Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But back in the 1970s we were promised that there would be renewable energy. Green energy. No more gas and oil. I know Reagan kind of killed solar, at least for a while, by taking away the tax credit for it. They're all in cahoots to make more money, that's all it is. And they don't care about safety.
Try living within a few miles of one of those things and you DO hear stories, not rumors, actual truth. And if they were so safe, why did we keep receiving evacuation procedures--get to the nearest bus stop, wait for the bus, it will take you to safety. hahahahaha. One guy said he would probably just wade out into the ocean and boil to death.
Somebody, somewhere needs to be working on other forms of energy. No fair asking me WHAT or WHERE--but I've lived near one and never would again. Some people try to put up a sense of macho about it. Most people wouldn't want one in their backyard though.
Not one word of your post is accurate. Why are you making stuff up?
Whose they?
All about making money?
Don't care about safety?
True stories I heard? care to share?
Boil to death?
Someone? somewhere?
It's not fair to ask for explanations?
Macho nuclear workers?
These are tin foil hat accusations. You got some splainin' to do.
i was just posting about thorium when the next post showed lol
when you read about the differences in engineering approach between the two you will be astounded
an example is with the British air-cooled monster built solely for bomb material...seems the science was so new that an unexpected sub-reaction occurred that needed to be fixed by taking each of thousands of air-cooling vanes and manually removing an 1/8 inch with a Gerry-riged device similar to a wood plane...WOW
more to the point on our solid reactors are all kinds of de-stabilizing corrosive actions..heat reactions metal warping things that are eliminated with liquid fuel
Last edited by elvis44102; 06-02-2019 at 02:08 PM..
They should shut down the one in Seabook, NH. There are problems with it that are always covered up, yet they still renew its license. And there is no viable means of escape for the people who live anywhere near it. Evacuation procedures they send out are a joke.
Replace these monstrosities with renewable energy. And don't forget Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, Fukushima, etc. In most cases there was a lot more damage than was made public, long lasting damage. Be strong enough to admit that it was a wrong turn in the road, back up, and start over with something better.
You start this reactor on uranium or plutonium salts.
Renewable? You breed thorium into protactinium233 allow it to decay for 33 days into uranium 233. Fissionable fuel. Thorium 232 is massively abundant.
And you get less waste byproducts as well. Also burns up waste generated by traditional fuel rod reactor designs...
Not one word of your post is accurate. Why are you making stuff up?
Whose they?
All about making money?
Don't care about safety?
True stories I heard? care to share?
Boil to death?
Someone? somewhere?
It's not fair to ask for explanations?
Macho nuclear workers?
These are tin foil hat accusations. You got some splainin' to do.
Ignorance breeds fear.
Fear breeds hate.
Hate breeds opposition to that which they do not understand.
Ignorance breeds fear.
Fear breeds hate.
Hate breeds opposition to that which they do not understand.
Hence why we cannot have nice things...
I never thought a nuclear power plant on the beach was a "nice thing" but if you say so.
I don't have a dog in this race--I don't live there anymore. Not too many people around there are thrilled with the thing and the people I've heard from in Plymouth are glad their monster is going away too. Still would be nice if somebody could dream up some other way. You could be rich!
Ignorance breeds fear.
Fear breeds hate.
Hate breeds opposition to that which they do not understand.
Hence why we cannot have nice things...
completely agree as i understand GE sells fuel rods to existing reactors and don't want this NEW technology (don't know the economics)
but apparently the US gave away research material (again) to China and they are doing work as we speak to further the process as i think there are some unanswered questions of corrosive materials but nothing that engineering cant solve..as opposed to taking a BAD idea of a 3000psi steam kettle and making that work!
We started to decommission our nuke plant at San Onofre early a due to to failure of newly installed heat exchangers. The ratepayers are taking a double hit in higher electricity costs plus the cost of a 20 year decommissioning process. In the meantime a crapload of spent fuel is still stored above ground at the site on the beach. Gotta be a better way than nukes.
We started to decommission our nuke plant at San Onofre early a due to to failure of newly installed heat exchangers. The ratepayers are taking a double hit in higher electricity costs plus the cost of a 20 year decommissioning process. In the meantime a crapload of spent fuel is still stored above ground at the site on the beach. Gotta be a better way than nukes.
Wouldn’t we be able to build better nuclear plants these days?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
