Merged nuclear power safe?

[maxley]

not just the racoons....
the whole earth will be better off without us.

I'm never sure what statements like this mean.

We are a 100% natural species. We're not a problem, or a disease the Earth has somehow picked up. We're as much part of the planet as oceans or rocks or deserts.

OK, we use the Earth's resources. Yes we alter the face of the planet. But so do locust swarms. So do elephant herds. So does the weather. And seismic activity.

The argument seems to be that by having an impact on the planet, we're irreparably destroying it. Well apart from scale, it's no different than me 'irreparably destroying' my garden by getting out there with a spade.

On the whole I like what we've done to the planet. I suspect we've made a better job of it than, say, cats would have, if they'd developed opposable thumbs instead.

 

[Aepervius]

nuclear power safe?

apparently not.

Nothing is safe in life. Nothing. The question is what are the risk, and are they acceptable, and what are the consequence when the risk becomes reality. The problem is, people don't seem to be able to rationaly assess the nuclear risks, and the media is not helping. 10000 people die in the tsunami, and all most of coverage we get is of the nuclear reactors.

 

[Aepervius]

I suspect we've made a better job of it than, say, cats would have, if they'd developed opposable thumbs instead.

You had such a wonderfully insightful post , and here you go ruining it . I say cat would have done a better job than dogs with opposite thumbs .

 

[Aepervius]

Good grief I am hearing the news, and I hear an error nearly every paragraph, and FUD at the same time. It is siomething to bang's one head against a wall. A hard wall.

 

[Cleon]

Regardless of actual damage done by the reactors, the psychological damage is done.

 

[Aepervius]

Regardless of actual damage done by the reactors, the psychological damage is done.

The psychological damage would not be that bad if the media did their job, instead of going for Sensationalist yellow journalism. Selling is more important than informing. That , or they are totally incompetent.

 

[dudalb]

nuclear power safe?

apparently not.

I knew one of our resident Luddites would show up.

 

[dudalb]

Call us when shovels hit dirt.

For BOTH political parties. They both have been dragging their asses too much on this.

It called the NIMBY factor. And both parties are sacared of it.
A lot of people who say they support nuclear power get cold feet when there is talk of a plant in a 20 Mile radius of where they live.

 

[Travis]

I'd welcome a nuclear plant within twenty miles of me.

 

[bikerdruid]

It called the NIMBY factor. And both parties are sacared of it.
A lot of people who say they support nuclear power get cold feet when there is talk of a plant in a 20 Mile radius of where they live.

s of t is one of those.
he strongly supports a proposed nuclear plant that bruce power wants to build in my back yard.
at least i'm not a nimby type.
i don't support nuclear power in anyone's backyard.

 

[Cleon]

It called the NIMBY factor. And both parties are sacared of it.
A lot of people who say they support nuclear power get cold feet when there is talk of a plant in a 20 Mile radius of where they live.

Well, there's also a "second-degree" NIMBYism, as well. Someone might be totally pro-nuclear, wouldn't have a problem having one nearby...Except for what that might do to their property values. Their home value may drop, it may become that much harder to sell or rent, etc.

It's not just people scared of nuclear plants, it's people who are scared of people who are scared of nuclear plants.

 

[Cainkane1]

Many people on this forum believe nuclear power to be safe, clean, efficient energy. If it is done right and built well, a nuclear power plant should stand well against what is thrown at it.

Others believe there is no such thing as safe nuclear. Nuclear power plants are simply accidents looking for a date to happen.

The Japanese were very much "the for want of a nail" school when it came to building nuclear reactors. They made them tough and resistant to earthquakes, storms, cold to hot weather. Tough didn't cut it March 11. A 9.0 quake followed by a tsunami slapped their islands around like half chilled Jello, overwhelming the performing specs of the nuclear reactors. We are now looking down the jaws of serious consequences of having such dangerous sources of energy on a jumpy, jittery Earth.

Georgia USA has very litle tectonic activity. I wish we had more than just one nuclear facility.

 

[Ambrosia]

sed nuclear plant that bruce power wants to build in my back yard.
at least i'm not a nimby type.
i don't support nuclear power in anyone's backyard.

Which makes you a person of NOTE.

(Not Over There Either)

 

[Debaser]

On the whole I like what we've done to the planet. I suspect we've made a better job of it than, say, cats would have, if they'd developed opposable thumbs instead.

Don't.Joke.About.This.

 

[bikerdruid]

Which makes you a person of NOTE.

(Not Over There Either)

 

[Ziggurat]

nuclear power is very safe....until there is a massive earthquake and/or massive power failure that even kills its fail-safe systems.

then...nuclear power is the most dangerous kind.

Really? More dangerous than natural gas? Your assertion is rather unproven. Are you aware of how nasty natural gas explosions can be? Are you aware of how fragile natural gas lines are to earthquakes?

Safety is relative. And relative to everything else that went down with this earthquake and tsunami, well, I don't think the nuclear plants are actually at the top of the danger list.

 

[Ziggurat]

not just the racoons....
the whole earth will be better off without us.

You first.

 

[Soapy Sam]

I can understand someone not wanting to live near a nuclear plant, but would they prefer a coal or oil burner? Or would they prefer it if the electrickery was produced somewhere else and just came out the hole in their wall on demand?
That's natural enough, too.

I get the impression BD is out in the boonies and may feel he'd like to stay that way, with or without power- and I can understand that , too.

But most people- even those who choose to live low consumption lives- are dependent to some extent on the existence of the larger society. If BD is injured, he probably would expect to go to a hospital with electric power. He needs someone to make the steel he uses for many things every day. He is just like many people who use power at second hand , who would prefer it to come from a windmill or a wave generator.
Me, too.
But numbers are against us.

Me- I work for Halliburton. I'm happy to drill those deepwater wells nobody wants. I'll cheerfully frac. the shale below your local aquifer. The fewer nuke plants in the world, the longer I'm guaranteed employment.

And I'd retire tomorrow if we had enough of them.

 

[bikerdruid]

You first.

i'm almost 60, so i might not be first, but i will be sooner than most.
i have no misconception that, as a species, we are any more valuable than the passenger pigeon or the dodo bird.
to think otherwise is prideful.

 

[lionking]

There are over 400 nuclear power plants today. How many do you hear of?