Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Living in a nuclear world? Nuclear Plant Explosions in Japan


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Living in a nuclear world? Nuclear Plant Explosions in Japan Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Living in a nuclear world? Nuclear Plant Explosions... - 3/14/2011 11:40:12 AM   
ChiDS


Posts: 100
Joined: 11/3/2008
Status: offline 		Indeed but as of right now we all have to be aware of the situation as it is presented to us.  Also as I have stated in my 2nd post the coolant is not graphite so another global Chernobyl incident is not possible.  But also keep in mind that does not mean radiation cannot reach the west coast of the US.

(in reply to ashjor911)
Profile   Post #: 61
RE: Living in a nuclear world? Nuclear Plant Explosions... - 3/14/2011 11:46:41 AM   
zenny


Posts: 275
Joined: 2/13/2008
Status: offline 		No, your information is incomplete at best and most realistically, purposefully very misleading. A carrier found radiation? Good for them. If I measured my room I would find radiation. Given there are no numbers attached to any of this I can only assume fear mongering or ignorance. The simple fact remains that unless primary containment is somehow magically breached then this doesn't matter. A meltdown simply means the Zircaloy vessal that holds the Uranium Oxide pellets has melted. Again, unless primary containment is breached, it doesn't matter. At all. All of this "the core may be exposed?" That means the core may be exposed inside the primary containment. I.e. the Zircaloy has melted. I find it ironic you quote someone saying the government lies but cannot fathom your news sources doing the same. I've done you the courtesy of reading your information. Now read mine, specifically the first link I provided.

(in reply to ChiDS)
Profile   Post #: 62
RE: Living in a nuclear world? Nuclear Plant Explosions... - 3/14/2011 11:47:50 AM   
servantforuse


Posts: 6363
Joined: 3/8/2006
Status: offline 		There are 104 nuclear power plants in the United States. Not one person has ever been killed in this country because of one of those plants. I would say that they are safe.

(in reply to ChiDS)
Profile   Post #: 63
RE: Living in a nuclear world? Nuclear Plant Explosions... - 3/14/2011 11:51:45 AM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

There are 104 nuclear power plants in the United States. Not one person has ever been killed in this country because of one of those plants. I would say that they are safe.



I live about 5 1/2 miles atcf from San Onofre. Im not rushing out for iodine pills.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to servantforuse)
Profile   Post #: 64
RE: Living in a nuclear world? Nuclear Plant Explosions... - 3/14/2011 11:51:50 AM   
ChiDS


Posts: 100
Joined: 11/3/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: zenny

No, your information is incomplete at best and most realistically, purposefully very misleading. A carrier found radiation? Good for them. If I measured my room I would find radiation. Given there are no numbers attached to any of this I can only assume fear mongering or ignorance. The simple fact remains that unless primary containment is somehow magically breached then this doesn't matter. A meltdown simply means the Zircaloy vessal that holds the Uranium Oxide pellets has melted. Again, unless primary containment is breached, it doesn't matter. At all. All of this "the core may be exposed?" That means the core may be exposed inside the primary containment. I.e. the Zircaloy has melted. I find it ironic you quote someone saying the government lies but cannot fathom your news sources doing the same. I've done you the courtesy of reading your information. Now read mine, specifically the first link I provided.



So your telling me a US carrier is gunna turn around because of normal radiation that would register on any geiger counter?  I'm sure that as much as I am aware that there is normal radiation ALWAYS, I would think the people aboard the carrier would also be aware.  Man made radiation is very different. In fact if they did turn around due to normal radiation that would make them stupid.  My personal opinion being, I don't think they're stupid.  In fact being as I was a hospital corpsmen in the US Navy.  I KNOW they are not that stupid.

I have read your source.  I choose to disagree.  I've also heard things from scientists.  Plus if you haven't noticed.  I have many sources and one primary, that I personally feel to be unbiased.  You have stated 2.  Here take a look at my primary.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVCWGc173ic&feature=player_embedded

< Message edited by ChiDS -- 3/14/2011 11:57:04 AM >

(in reply to zenny)
Profile   Post #: 65
RE: Living in a nuclear world? Nuclear Plant Explosions... - 3/14/2011 11:56:45 AM   
DarkestDezirez


Posts: 24
Joined: 2/11/2011
Status: offline 		The radiation measured on the Reagan was equal to about one month's worth of normal background radiation (i.e. about 30 times background). Not the end of the world but not something you want to continue with for an extended period.

dd.

(in reply to ChiDS)
Profile   Post #: 66
RE: Living in a nuclear world? Nuclear Plant Explosions... - 3/14/2011 12:00:08 PM   
zenny


Posts: 275
Joined: 2/13/2008
Status: offline 		You're quite welcome. In this case I too wonder who would pay for it. I think that'll come down to who is willing to go through the hassle of getting all the permits.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChiDS

Also as I have stated in my 2nd post the coolant is not graphite so another global Chernobyl incident is not possible.


Uhh, Chernobyl used water as coolant and graphite as a neutron moderator. Also, Chynobyl did not have any sort of containment for the core.

(in reply to Edwynn)
Profile   Post #: 67
RE: Living in a nuclear world? Nuclear Plant Explosions... - 3/14/2011 12:02:34 PM   
ChiDS


Posts: 100
Joined: 11/3/2008
Status: offline 		The Japanese are saying at the IMMEDIATE SITE only, the radiation you would be exposed to in 1 hour would be 1 year's worth of normal backyard radiation.700 times the normal level.


< Message edited by ChiDS -- 3/14/2011 12:06:36 PM >

(in reply to DarkestDezirez)
Profile   Post #: 68
RE: Living in a nuclear world? Nuclear Plant Explosions... - 3/14/2011 12:05:50 PM   
ChiDS


Posts: 100
Joined: 11/3/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: zenny

You're quite welcome. In this case I too wonder who would pay for it. I think that'll come down to who is willing to go through the hassle of getting all the permits.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChiDS

Also as I have stated in my 2nd post the coolant is not graphite so another global Chernobyl incident is not possible.


Uhh, Chernobyl used water as coolant and graphite as a neutron moderator. Also, Chynobyl did not have any sort of containment for the core.



The containment only serves to prevent the radiation from going OUT.  The top has blown off.  Therefor the radiation is going UP.  It is not "contained" by any means.  But you are correct.  The graphite was the moderator.  My point about the graphite was that it carried the radiation further than it will be possible in this situation.

(in reply to zenny)
Profile   Post #: 69
RE: Living in a nuclear world? Nuclear Plant Explosions... - 3/14/2011 12:11:17 PM   
RapierFugue


Posts: 4740
Joined: 3/16/2006
From: London, England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ashjor911

not only wave of radiation
I remember in london in 1990 it was 4 years after chernobel & there was acide rain


What the fuck are you talking about?

(in reply to ashjor911)
Profile   Post #: 70
RE: Living in a nuclear world? Nuclear Plant Explosions... - 3/14/2011 12:12:02 PM   
zenny


Posts: 275
Joined: 2/13/2008
Status: offline 		I only posted one source relating to this incident. Actually read my source, it addressed the actual facts of the situation. Not asks a (supposed) physicist about psychology. I like how he makes assertions without reasons. At least my primary (and only) source explains things.

You do realize that the linear no-threshold theory of radiation (what all your feels are based on) has been debunked, right? Look into something called hormesis theory.

(in reply to ChiDS)
Profile   Post #: 71
RE: Living in a nuclear world? Nuclear Plant Explosions... - 3/14/2011 12:16:39 PM   
ChiDS


Posts: 100
Joined: 11/3/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: zenny

I only posted one source relating to this incident. Actually read my source, it addressed the actual facts of the situation. Not asks a (supposed) physicist about psychology. I like how he makes assertions without reasons. At least my primary (and only) source explains things.

You do realize that the linear no-threshold theory of radiation (what all your feels are based on) has been debunked, right? Look into something called hormesis theory.



Its very easy to point a finger and call any scientist incorrect without any supporting argument to actually discredit the source.  I have not discredited yours, only stated that I disagree.  But what I find funny is I don't hear you saying anything about our carrier anymore do I?   My point still stands.  If what your saying is true and the THEORY you quoted correct.  Then why did our carrier turn around and run away when their mission was specifically to aid Japan?  Looks like things are not as under control as you seem to think

3 reactors have suffered a partial meltdown and your still sitting there saying there's nothing to worry about lmao.


< Message edited by ChiDS -- 3/14/2011 12:18:11 PM >

(in reply to zenny)
Profile   Post #: 72
RE: Living in a nuclear world? Nuclear Plant Explosions... - 3/14/2011 12:19:56 PM   
zenny


Posts: 275
Joined: 2/13/2008
Status: offline 		No. Thanks for proving you did not read my source. The top of containment 3 blew off. Containment 2 and 1 are still intact. In relieving some pressure various radiative gasses did escape.

Not really. Exposure of the core is bad, end of story. That the graphite modulator reacted in air and blew some of the core into the environment just means clean up was more difficult. Not that more or less radiation would have escaped.

(in reply to ChiDS)
Profile   Post #: 73
RE: Living in a nuclear world? Nuclear Plant Explosions... - 3/14/2011 12:24:49 PM   
ChiDS


Posts: 100
Joined: 11/3/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: zenny

No. Thanks for proving you did not read my source. The top of containment 3 blew off. Containment 2 and 1 are still intact. In relieving some pressure various radiative gasses did escape.

Not really. Exposure of the core is bad, end of story. That the graphite modulator reacted in air and blew some of the core into the environment just means clean up was more difficult. Not that more or less radiation would have escaped. All have suffered at least partial melt downs in the fuel rods if not worse.



Gasses escaped?  Im sorry there was an explosion due to the build up of hydrogen.  They didn't just escape.  Also reactor 1 was the first to explode just FYI.  3 only exploded recently.  So please check your sources.  2 is the only reactor that has yet to explode but it is being reported that its looking like a 3rd explosion is very likely.

Secondly when did I EVER say graphite increased the radiation.  I said it carried it FURTHER due to the composition of the cloud.

< Message edited by ChiDS -- 3/14/2011 12:27:03 PM >

(in reply to zenny)
Profile   Post #: 74
RE: Living in a nuclear world? Nuclear Plant Explosions... - 3/14/2011 12:26:41 PM   
zenny


Posts: 275
Joined: 2/13/2008
Status: offline 		You're asking me why the ship turned around. Of that I have no idea. My bad, third containment is still intact, It's the building that blew.

(in reply to ChiDS)
Profile   Post #: 75
RE: Living in a nuclear world? Nuclear Plant Explosions... - 3/14/2011 12:29:44 PM   
ChiDS


Posts: 100
Joined: 11/3/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: zenny

You're asking me why the ship turned around. Of that I have no idea. My bad, third containment is still intact, It's the building that blew.



You have no idea because you haven't looked at my sources.  Your so quick to point a finger yet you cant even walk your own talk.  Yes the building blew.  However containment doesnt prevent radiation from leaking.  As it is.  The structure itself is reinforced to prevent an outward explosion.  Hence my statement the radiation isnt going out, its going up.  This is why wind conditions are very important right now.  Because if the radiation reaches the upper atmosphere it will almost certainly reach the US.  Reports are stating it will take a week for the radiation to make it across the Pacific.

See that's the problem with only having one source.  Your taking one person's word for it.  If there was no risk.  The carrier would have preceded as planned.  But they didn't, did they?  Keep watching CNBC and FOX news buddy.


< Message edited by ChiDS -- 3/14/2011 12:38:53 PM >

(in reply to zenny)
Profile   Post #: 76
RE: Living in a nuclear world? Nuclear Plant Explosions... - 3/14/2011 12:37:27 PM   
zenny


Posts: 275
Joined: 2/13/2008
Status: offline 		Your sources are in apparent competition to my source, when they actually talk about nuclear power. My source gives explanations that are logically sound and coincide with what little I know about nuclear power from my physics classes. I think I'll be trusting my source from an independent, non-news or government body. I read your sources. As in my first posts. They are at best incomplete and more than likely purposefully misleading. If this, by some miracle turns into the next Chernobyl, I'll be happy to retract my statements and wait for the official report to see how all 3 containment were magically breached when as of yet NONE are. Until then, I stand by my source and what I've said.

(in reply to ChiDS)
Profile   Post #: 77
RE: Living in a nuclear world? Nuclear Plant Explosions... - 3/14/2011 12:42:09 PM   
ChiDS


Posts: 100
Joined: 11/3/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: zenny

Your sources are in apparent competition to my source, when they actually talk about nuclear power. My source gives explanations that are logically sound and coincide with what little I know about nuclear power from my physics classes. I think I'll be trusting my source from an independent, non-news or government body. I read your sources. As in my first posts. They are at best incomplete and more than likely purposefully misleading. If this, by some miracle turns into the next Chernobyl, I'll be happy to retract my statements and wait for the official report to see how all 3 containment were magically breached when as of yet NONE are. Until then, I stand by my source and what I've said.


Again, I have multiple sources.  You have one.  I'm not taking anyone's word for it.  I'm taking what EVERYONE'S saying and comparing/contrasting.  Then looking at what everyone's actually doing.  So if there's no risk like your source says.  Then I guess the 20KMs around the plant being evacuated, people being told by their government to stay in doors, don't use the AC, don't drink the tap water, is all just propaganda and lies.  Yeah sounds like everythings A-OK buddy.  How could I ever have disagreed with you.

And if you question THAT source, well that one was right out of the prime minister of Japan's own mouth.  So go right ahead.

< Message edited by ChiDS -- 3/14/2011 12:45:43 PM >

(in reply to zenny)
Profile   Post #: 78
RE: Living in a nuclear world? Nuclear Plant Explosions... - 3/14/2011 12:55:39 PM   
zenny


Posts: 275
Joined: 2/13/2008
Status: offline 		Stay indoors: They just had an 8.9 earthquake and tsunami. Staying indoors is probably a good idea. By questioning this you're questioning why people stayed in doors during Katrina.
Don't use a/c: They're missing a huge power source from their grid. What do you expect?
Don't drink the tap water: Again, tsunami. When there is flooding in cities they tell you not to drink the tap water.
20km evacuated: Sounds like SOP to me. You think there isn't evacuation in any other areas that just have damage from the two disasters?

Your approach, unfortunately, assumes things that are politically motivated (or motivated by things other than real dangers) is because there is a danger. My source is non-affiliated. Yours are.

It boggles my mind that people are so concerned about something that will probably only have a lasting effect on half a dozen people when thousands are dead, people don't have clean water, electricity, and are displaced from their homes.Actually, it doesn't. Fear through ignorance.

Question their PM? Do you know ANYTHING about their culture?


< Message edited by zenny -- 3/14/2011 12:57:53 PM >

(in reply to ChiDS)
Profile   Post #: 79
RE: Living in a nuclear world? Nuclear Plant Explosions... - 3/14/2011 1:16:39 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: zenny

No, your information is incomplete at best and most realistically, purposefully very misleading. A carrier found radiation? Good for them. If I measured my room I would find radiation. Given there are no numbers attached to any of this I can only assume fear mongering or ignorance. The simple fact remains that unless primary containment is somehow magically breached then this doesn't matter. A meltdown simply means the Zircaloy vessal that holds the Uranium Oxide pellets has melted. Again, unless primary containment is breached, it doesn't matter. At all. All of this "the core may be exposed?" That means the core may be exposed inside the primary containment. I.e. the Zircaloy has melted. I find it ironic you quote someone saying the government lies but cannot fathom your news sources doing the same. I've done you the courtesy of reading your information. Now read mine, specifically the first link I provided.


Primary containment has failed. If you actually knew what you were talking about the fact that radioactive caesium and iodine have been found outside the reactor would be sufficient to tell you that things are far worse than is being reported.

(in reply to zenny)
Profile   Post #: 80
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Living in a nuclear world? Nuclear Plant Explosions in Japan Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094