High oil prices are the "Achillies heel" of our economy... (funds, exam)

[Chango]

Originally Posted by roadrat

Why do you think Nuclear energy is on the decline?
The only reasons I see at least here in America is fear and ignorance.

I suppose this is "Fear and ignorance" about nuclear power?







The Long-Term Effects of Radiation Exposure | GoozNews

http://i690.photobucket.com/albums/vv261/utrebo/graphics/yuccamountain.jpg (broken link)
It's great when it works, but when thing inevitably go wrong (or when it's time to get rid of the spent fuel), the negative long term effects are measured in the thousands of years.

But the news doesn't talk about it anymore so it all be OK now...

[2018]

Did you even read the Yucca Mountain information you posted?

[texdav]

In the end the world now is in a contest to secure crude energy because of its over all cheap cost compared to other forms. Crude will likely determine the winners and losers for at least 50 years to come.When alternative become the most available it will not be cheaper really.Then of course it will require replacement of 19000 other essential products producted from crude now. Right now no single alternative produces 1% of that needed and the closest is wood to 1%.Crude;natural gas and coal are the fuels for energy for generations to come, Nuclear will be developed more even with the risk by any country that wants growth in their economy.

[roadrat]

Originally Posted by Chango

I suppose this is "Fear and ignorance" about nuclear power?







The Long-Term Effects of Radiation Exposure | GoozNews


It's great when it works, but when thing inevitably go wrong (or when it's time to get rid of the spent fuel), the negative long term effects are measured in the thousands of years.

But the news doesn't talk about it anymore so it all be OK now...

This is exactly the "Fear and Ignorance" I am talking about, Fukashima is old (built in 71) and out dated, and built in a place none for earthquakes and tsunamis.

The French model for utilizing nuclear power is a great example of how it should be done.
Nuclear Power in France | French Nuclear Energy
Why The French Like Nuclear Energy | Nuclear Reaction | FRONTLINE | PBS

and as far as the spent fuel,
Nuclear Wasteland - IEEE Spectrum

Recycling Nuclear Fuel The French Do It Why Cant Oui

P.S. Thanks for putting up the Yucca mountain info.


bill

[M3 Mitch]

I think the Fukushima fallout map is wildly exaggerated - 750 Rads, assuming beta-gamma primarily which is good for fission products - is approximately 750 REM, which is beyond the LD 50-30 dose (the dose that will kill half of "average" troops within 30 days) (assuming minimal medical care)

I am on the west coast, I don't see dead bodies piled up.

Even Chernobyl - firstly, the event only happened because an operating crew took the plant way, way outside its normal "envelope" - secondy they inadventently established the outer limits for what a reactor accident can be, given the worst plant and the worst accident management - and it was bad, but having been to the zone it's not a wasteland, it would not be a good idea to live there but the wildlife and trees are like a nature preserve.

Fukushima was bad, and accident management was not all it could have been, but to the best of my knowledge only 3 people at the plant died during the event, none of these due to any radioactive effects.

[Philip T]

Originally Posted by M3 Mitch

I am on the west coast, I don't see dead bodies piled up.

Did you see the reports on I-131, or the EPA Test Monitor results?

Even Chernobyl - firstly, the event only happened because an operating crew took the plant way, way outside its normal "envelope" - secondy they inadventently established the outer limits for what a reactor accident can be, given the worst plant and the worst accident management - and it was bad, but having been to the zone it's not a wasteland, it would not be a good idea to live there but the wildlife and trees are like a nature preserve.

Yes, yes. A beautiful thing, really.

It blew up and dumped across much of Europe, not really a big deal, and probably way overstated, and now look at the blessings that have flowed from it all.

A large, radioactive, nature preserve.

Quite Lovely, indeed.

Fukushima was bad, and accident management was not all it could have been, but to the best of my knowledge only 3 people at the plant died during the event, none of these due to any radioactive effects.

The results of the intake of radioactive Iodine, Cesium and Strontium will be seen across years and decades.

Not something measured on a stop-watch.

Do you really not know this, or are you just playing games?

[Philip T]

Originally Posted by roadrat

This is exactly the "Fear and Ignorance" I am talking about, Fukashima is old (built in 71) and out dated, and built in a place none for earthquakes and tsunamis.

The French model for utilizing nuclear power is a great example of how it should be done.
Nuclear Power in France | French Nuclear Energy
Why The French Like Nuclear Energy | Nuclear Reaction | FRONTLINE | PBS

and as far as the spent fuel,
Nuclear Wasteland - IEEE Spectrum

Recycling Nuclear Fuel The French Do It Why Cant Oui

P.S. Thanks for putting up the Yucca mountain info.


bill

Do you actually read the articles you link?

Do you understand why a "French" model is a mis-fit for the US?

[Peerless]

So much for low prices of oil/barrel!!

Onwards towards $90 now.

And gas prices?

Up like a rocket, down like a feather.

[Philip T]

Originally Posted by Peerless

So much for low prices of oil/barrel!!

Onwards towards $90 now.

And gas prices?

Up like a rocket, down like a feather.

Yep. First one off Oil wins.

And wins big.

[roadrat]

Originally Posted by Philip T

Do you actually read the articles you link?

Do you understand why a "French" model is a mis-fit for the US?

yes I did did you?

No I do not please enlighten me!



bill