General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFate of Japan and the Whole World Depends on No. 4 Reactor
The Fourth reactor at Fukushima. The yellow area is the
containment vessel, 02/20/12. (photo: Asahi Shimbum Digital)
By Akio Matsumura, Finding the Missing Link
Reader Supported News
11 April 2012
Fukushima Daiichi site: Cesium-137 is 85 times greater than at Chernobyl accident.
Japan’s former Ambassador to Switzerland, Mr. Mitsuhei Murata, was invited to speak at the Public Hearing of the Budgetary Committee of the House of Councilors on March 22, 2012, on the Fukushima nuclear power plants accident.
Before the Committee, Ambassador Murata strongly stated that if the crippled building of reactor unit 4 - with 1,535 fuel rods in the spent fuel pool 100 feet (30 meters) above the ground - collapses, not only will it cause a shutdown of all six reactors but will also affect the common spent fuel pool containing 6,375 fuel rods, located some 50 meters from reactor 4.
In both cases the radioactive rods are not protected by a containment vessel; dangerously, they are open to the air. This would certainly cause a global catastrophe like we have never before experienced. He stressed that the responsibility of Japan to the rest of the world is immeasurable.
Such a catastrophe would affect us all for centuries. Ambassador Murata informed us that the total numbers of the spent fuel rods at the Fukushima Daiichi site excluding the rods in the pressure vessel is 11,421 (396+615+566+1,535+994+940+6375).
MORE
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
tabasco
(22,974 posts)I'm gonna wait and see on those magazine subscriptions.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)
PCIntern
(28,369 posts)Remember those 'folk' claiming that crap right after this catastrophe occurred?
Poll_Blind
(23,864 posts)PB
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Aerows
(39,961 posts)They were absolutely obvious in their shilling for nuclear power.
Generic Other
(29,080 posts)I tangled with one just this weekend. They don't care what they say.
madokie
(51,076 posts)5 posters is all I have to ignore and now I don't have to read their screeds about how, what we know we don't really know, bullshit.
Its easy to figure out the five of them too.
You know what, I don't miss anything they have to say about this either. I'd rather not know something as to know a lie.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Well, there are those occasional moments, still...
snooper2
(30,151 posts)Take 100Billion off defense budget and cut Oil subsidies and send that money to fusion research--
That's the future baby! ITER is going to be interesting to keep up with over the next couple decades---
ITER (originally an acronym of International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor) is an international nuclear fusion research and engineering project, which is currently building the world's largest and most advanced experimental tokamak nuclear fusion reactor at Cadarache in the south of France.[1] The ITER project aims to make the long-awaited transition from experimental studies of plasma physics to full-scale electricity-producing fusion power plants. The project is funded and run by seven member entities — the European Union (EU), India, Japan, the People's Republic of China, Russia, South Korea and the United States. The EU, as host party for the ITER complex, is contributing 45% of the cost, with the other six parties contributing 9% each.[2][3][4]
The ITER fusion reactor itself has been designed to produce 500 megawatts of output power for 50 megawatts of input power, or ten times the amount of energy put in.[5] The machine is expected to demonstrate the principle of getting more energy out of the fusion process than is used to initiate it, something that has not been achieved with previous fusion reactors. Construction of the facility began in 2007, and the first plasma is expected in 2019.[6] When ITER becomes operational, it will become the largest magnetic confinement plasma physics experiment in use, surpassing the Joint European Torus. The first commercial demonstration fusion power plant, named DEMO, is proposed to follow on from the ITER project to bring fusion energy to the commercial market.[7]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER
Aerows
(39,961 posts)And I perused no further. I want nothing to do with radiation near my ovaries, my kidneys or my neighborhood.
Hope that's clear enough 
PearliePoo2
(7,768 posts)They're still shilling.
They believe nuclear is the best thing since "pockets on a shirt".
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)You need three.
roamer65
(37,953 posts)"It's just like having a chest x-ray...over and over and over again."
Sadly I wish Daichi was a SNL skit, but its not. Its death they are playing with...for hundreds of thousands if not millions.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)My heart and soul feel crushed because it really feels like this is an end-the-world catastrophe and I grieve for all of us. 
K and R for an important article
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)As well as the Hopi Prophecies and the Kogi prophecies... hell, the list goes on
as far as warnings from the elders of so MANY indigenous tribes.
I'm with you, this scares the hell out of me.
BHN 
caraher
(6,359 posts)The possibility of a fire in a spent fuel pool that's lost its coolant is a very serious problem. Obviously the condition of the plant renders safer storage of those rods a big technical challenge that must be solved, and the stakes are high indeed.
However...
It serves nobody to say patently ridiculous things like "the fate of the whole world" hangs on this. A spent fuel fire would result in locally severe contamination, and that is serious enough to make this situation an ongoing emergency deserving immediate action. But the article linked in the OP tells us
The total spent reactor fuel inventory at the Fukushima-Daichi site contains nearly half of the total amount of Cs-137 estimated by the NCRP to have been released by all atmospheric nuclear weapons testing, Chernobyl, and world-wide reprocessing plants (~270 million curies or ~9.9 E+18 Becquerel).
In other words, the worst case scenario globally is essentially 50% more exposure to fission products than we've already been exposed to. That's not a prospect to take lightly, but it's not going to wipe out everybody any more than the atmospheric bomb testing programs and Chernobyl did.
It must be taken very seriously - fallout and Chernobyl did kill - but it's scarcely going to be the end of civilization (the way, say, global warming or a nuclear war might be).
jeff47
(26,549 posts)I read that prediction right here on this web site! Surely it must have happened!
Peace Patriot
(24,010 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)Does basic math only work if you live in the right area?
snooper2
(30,151 posts)But addition and division are not well understood LOL
Peace Patriot
(24,010 posts)
Ecumenist
(6,086 posts)Real easy to make those f*cked up suppositions and sick joke like comments...IF YOU DON'T LIVE HERE. If something were to happen here, (high contamination), it won't be so funny then. ALOT of this country's and the world's food comes from us.
NickB79
(20,356 posts)If it makes a difference where you live on this planet, then the fate of the entire planet isn't really in danger.
MadHound
(34,179 posts)Well, several actually, but let's get to the big point you're missing.
Yes, a fire would release a massive amount of radioactive material into the environment. Yes, it would "only" be roughly fifty percent of what has been released on this Earth over time. But that is the the key term, time. While there has been a lot of radioactive material released over the years, if the No. 4 reactor, and all those fuel rods went, we would be getting all that exposure at once, not over the course of seventy years.
This dosage would be spread worldwide, in the atmosphere, in the water. Some would remain airborne for a long, long time, some would sink to the bottom of the ocean(however given Cesium's long half life, this could be the gift that keeps on giving and giving). But a lot of that fallout would come down over land, mainly North America, followed by Europe, and then on from there.
Even if three quarters of this amount were (temporarily) eliminated from human contact by ocean and air, that would still leave roughly 70 million curies to settle on this planet. Let's put that into some perspective.
If this material were to fallout into farmland, it would be taken up by plants, which would then be ingested by humans, or by animals that humans eat. The fatal dosage to kill somebody via ingestion is only 238 microcuries. But first this material has to come down, through the atmosphere, the same atmosphere which we all breathe. It only takes approximately 48 microcuries to be a lethal dose via inhalation.
I'll let you do the math, but suffice it to say, if this all truly went worst case scenario, there would be enough radioactive material coming down over North America to kill every man, woman and child on this continent were they to either inhale or ingest it. Our crops would immediately become unfit for consumption. The air we breathe would become toxic, and would have to be filtered in some very special, and expensive ways. Ordinary filter masks wouldn't do the job, and the equipment that would do the job is in very limited quantity, certainly not enough to protect even one tenth of one percent of our population
That is a huge dose to take, and no, it would not be a local event, it would indeed be a worldwide catastrophe. And besides the immediate effects of such a disaster, we would also be facing long term consequences. After a couple of years aloft, radioactive material would begin to rain down across the face of this Earth. A large portion of our potable water supply would become contaminated, even reaching our groundwater aquifers with time. In short, while humanity probably would survive in certain remote areas, civilization as we know it would collapse.
This is not an overreaction, these aren't anonymous internet posters who are trying to spread panic. These are respected, courageous, recognized experts in their field. Having worked in a nuclear reactor for a number of years, I am perfectly aware of the dangers they are talking about, and the dire consequences that we all face if No. 4 fails catastrophically. To try and downplay this danger is the height of folly, especially if you have no real clue about what you are talking about.
Peace Patriot
(24,010 posts)Anyone who could minimize such a catastrophe--even if it were limited to Japan--is a first class jerk.
One weather cycle.
All over the northern hemisphere.
In weeks.
Fire has been the danger to the rest of us all along--fire, of course, which spews deadly radiation into the atmosphere, and hydrogen or any other kind of explosion. The Japanese are the most at risk, even without fires and explosions. To minimize their danger from the fuel rods in Reactor 4 and nearby fuel rods, and from the initial meltdowns, is extremely xenophobic if not racist. To minimize what fires (or explosions) will do to the northern hemisphere is mindbogglingly stupid and typical of the "clever" profiteers of the nuclear industry.
This is madness. We are being led by madmen to the end of most life on earth--in an era in which we could have been celebrating peace and prosperity for all; in an era of the most astonishing scientific advances in history, in every field from astronomy to genetics, from the cosmos to the quark; in the first era in human history in which we have all seen the earth from the moon, and, for the first time in human history, can see with our own eyes that there are no borders on earth, and that we are "one people" all over the earth.
It is an era in which infinite, free energy is within our grasp; an era in which a vast extension of human life, and even immortality, is within our grasp; an era in which contact with other civilizations in our galaxy has become probable, in which we have realized that life is likely to have developed elsewhere, in many places, among the hundreds of millions of galaxies that we now realize are there; it is an era in which we have landed exploration machines on Mars and sent them out of the Solar System. It is an era of staggeringly powerful computer and communications technology. And it is an era in which innovators, from "first world" organic farmers to "third world" traditional and Indigenous farmers and other lovers of the plant world and respecters of its diversity and resilience, are creating sustainable agriculture on their own, giving us all the opportunity to reform the world food supply.
It is a wondrous era--that could all come to a swift and horrible end, by our own hands!
Yet our leaders, at least here in the U.S., refuse to acknowledge the catastrophic danger of nuclear power and that other danger--global warming (not only catastrophic warming--melting ice caps, extreme weather, flooding of islands and coasts--but also the catastrophic impacts on other, already severely stressed and depleted species and on the entire ecology of the planet).
If the human race survives to write a history of this era--or if someone else writes it--what they will be struck by is our unbelievable STUPIDITY resulting from the "corporatization" of our governments. We did this to ourselves--we committed suicide--for the profit of the few!
Sirveri
(4,517 posts)It then would need to cross the entirety of the Pacific Ocean without precipitating.
This also assumes that a fire would be allowed to rage continuously and consume the entire mass of materials with absolutely no attempt to combat it.
So while it wouldn't be good, calling it the 'end of the world' is a bit hyperbolic.
MadHound
(34,179 posts)You obviously have no clue about how anything nuclear works, and all you're doing is spreading disinformation.
The fact of the matter is that a hell of a lot more than ten percent of the material will become airborne if fuel rods catch on fire. In fact, if things get hot enough, the zirconium cladding will burst, releasing aerosols into the environment, and eventually become a molten mess of zirconium and uranium. This fire can easily spread to other fuel assemblies, causing them to go up as well. If no coolant is supplied, these fires continue for a long, long time, and can put a lot of material into the air, much of it at great heights, high enough that it won't precipitate out over the ocean.
You really have no clue do you?
snooper2
(30,151 posts)I didn't know that, sweet, we have all kinds of folks with different expertise here!
Peace Patriot
(24,010 posts)-----
So, some of it precipitates into the Pacific Ocean? That solves the problem for you, does it?
Live anywhere in or near the Pacific Ocean? Ever eat anything from the Pacific Ocean? Does anybody you care about live on islands in the Pacific or near coasts that the Pacific touches? In the Americas? In Asia? You think the problem of fires spewing deadly radiation into the atmosphere is taken care of by destruction of the food source for billions of people (not to mention whales, dolphins and other critters)?
The oceans of Planet Earth are NOT the waste disposal sites for the nuclear industry!
Plus...PLUS...some of that deadly radiation being breathed and rained down on millions, and maybe billions, of people, and soaking into soils and water tables, contaminating crops and farm animals! You think mass death and illness and mass starvation are regrettable but no reason for alarm as long as they don't reach YOU?
Believe me, if Fukushima blows, it WILL reach you--whether you are in the path of the radiation or not. Our world will end. Your world will end. The vast and horrible disruption of everything you know and count on will occur. But airborne nuclear radiation knows no borders and chances are you live right along its path. If you don't live on or near the Pacific coast, maybe you will get a lesser dose. Or maybe it will fall upon your children, relatives or friends. At what point are you going to say that the end of your world has occurred? What level of death and destruction is necessary for you to call it "the end"?
End of the whales and dolphins and other sea life in the northern Pacific? End of California? End of California, Oregon and Washington? Five years of cancer deaths for half your community? Ten years?
Before you call "the end" an exaggeration, please define what level of catastrophe you are willing to say isn't "the end"?
Where do you live, hm?
-----------------------
I can't help but think of the generals of the Joint Chiefs telling JFK that we could "win" a nuclear war with Soviet Russia with "only" several hundred thousand casualties on the east coast. (See James Douglass' book, "JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters."
"Win" WHAT? A dead zone in a third of the country? A fourth of the country? A tenth of the country? How do you define "win" in a horror of that scale? How do you define "the end" in a horror of the potential scale as Fukushima? And how stupid is it to discourage people from considering the worst consequences of a man-made, preventable catastrophe with nuclear weapons or nuclear power? We MUST consider the worst because there is no going back, once the MAN-MADE catastrophe is in motion. You cannot put the nuclear geni back in the bottle! It is not like any other catastrophe.
Sirveri
(4,517 posts)I have also worked in the US Navy's Nuclear Program. I understand radcon, I understand dosage limits, and I understand how all of this stuff works better than the majority of people on this board.
You seem to imply that I said this would be a good thing. I didn't. My objection is to the blatant fear mongering that accomplishes absolutely nothing, most of it being baseless.
The most likely thing that would occur is a noticeable spike in cancer cases over the next 20 years, however the public at large would likely be ambivalent/ignorant about it. There will be no mass exodus. There will be no large swathes of contaminated fallow farm land. People will still live, work, and raise children on the west coast. The majority will not notice or care. It will not be the end of the world. And that will be that.
And in the end, what other outcome would you prefer? Rioting on the streets? Millions fleeing in terror? Some other paranoid doomer fantasy? I've spent enough time looking at Peak Oil to have seen a lot of that outlook.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)with nary a burp.
Nobody is hoping for all that shit to go into the pacific, but as the poster you took umbrage with, pointed out, hardly the end of the world.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)in an olympic size pool?
Did teachers ever broach these type of topics in science class in the 60's and 70's?
(Fair Use- Government Website)
http://www.nps.gov/wica/forteachers/upload/Hydrology-DyeTracing.pdf
DYE TRACIING
Objectives:
Students will:
• define how water can be traced as it moves underground,
• define parts-per-million and parts-per-billion,
• identify two dyes that are commonly used in
hydrologic dye traces.
Materials:
• Black light
• Eye dropper
• Sample bottles of rhodamine, fluorescein, and optical brightener
Procedure:
1. Ask the students to imagine that they have a delicate cave under their land. The cave has
several large pools, and water drips from the ceiling in many places. A rare species of
blind cavefish lives in several pools in the cave. Two streams run through their property
and disappear into the ground in the woods behind their house. The water in one stream
is very cloudy and may be polluted. Do the students think the water from the streams is
entering the cave? How can they find out?
2. Discuss hydrologic dye tracing. Show the students examples of rhodamine and
fluorescein, two types of dyes that are often used in dye traces. Stress that the dye is nontoxic
and is used in very dilute concentrations.
3. The dye is fluorescent, and often an “optical brightener” (show students the sample
bottle) is added to the dye to increase its fluorescence. Optical brightener is found in
laundry detergents. It is the ingredient that makes your whites appear whiter and your
brights appear brighter, by reflecting sunlight. Turn off the classroom lights and pull
down the shades. Turn on the black light and walk around the room holding the
brightener near students’ clothes, demonstrating to each student that the optical
brightener fluoresces. DO NOT SHINE THE BLACKLIGHT IN ANYONE’S EYES!
4. The students are going to use fluorescent dye to trace the streams into the cave. Have
them determine how they will tell which stream is providing water to the different pools
and drip sites in the cave. (They can put fluorescein in one stream and rhodamine in the
other.)
5. How can the dye be detected once it enters the cave? In most cases, the dye will be so
dilute that it will be invisible to the naked eye. The pools of water in the cave probably
will not turn red or green. Can the fluorescence of the dye help in its detection? Tell the
students that samples of the water are brought out of the cave and to the surface where
they are tested in a fluorometer. A fluorometer can be used to detect very small
quantities of fluorescent dye in solution. A fluorometer is a machine that detects the
amount of light that passes through the water. The dyes will reflect light at different
wavelengths, making it possible to detect fluorescein and rhodamine separately.
6. A fluorometer can detect even a few parts-per-billion of rhodamine or fluorescein. What
does this mean? Tell the students that if they put a single drop of dye into a 50’x25’x4.5’
swimming pool, they have a one part-per-billion solution. 3 drops yields a 3 ppb
Pollution
Water in the Environment • 121
solution. Certain dyes can only be detected in larger concentrations, such as a part-permillion.
If you put one drop of dye into a 44-gallon barrel, you have a 1-ppm solution.
You may wish to use an eyedropper to illustrate these concentrations.
7. Distribute copies of the attached worksheet. The students should color Sinking Stream
green (representing fluorescein) and Pine Creek Stream red (representing rhodamine).
Have the students use the data on the back of the worksheet to determine which pools
and/or drip sites in the cave could be polluted. Why was testing done before the dye was
injected? Discuss background levels of fluorescence. What might cause background
levels? (Antifreeze [fluorescein makes it green; rhodamine makes it red] or laundry
detergents [with optical brightners] or other chemicals that contain fluorescein or
rhodamine would show up as background levels.) What seems to be the approximate
background level of rhodamine in this case? Fluorescein? A positive dye concentration
must be at least 3 times greater than the background level.
8. The students should color parts of the cave to illustrate the results of the dye trace. How
do they think the water traveled through the limestone to reach particular sites in the
cave? How long did the water take to reach the cave?
9. Have the students consider the following:
• What effect will the polluted water have on the cave?
• How can the pollution be cleaned up?
• How can the students identify the source of the pollution?
• How many other things could the pollutant be affecting?
• Will the pollutants stay in the cave or will they have a farther-reaching effect?
• What will this do to the wildlife in the cave?
10. Building on what the students have learned in previous activities, discuss:
• what would happen if the limestone was covered with a layer of sandstone.
• How long might the water take to reach the cave?
• What effect will this have on the pollution?
• What about the wildlife?
• What about the cave in the future if the rock above is holding contaminants?
11. How can studies like this help the entire area in the future? Imagine real life place where
dye tracing is taking place, places like Wind Cave National Park. By studying dye in the
cave, what actions do you think will be made on the surface? Notice where the buildings
are and where the water drains. Do you think information like this could help set limits
of the numbers of people
allowed to visit the cave?
What about where they are
able to park their vehicles?
(Concerns about leaking oil,
gas, antifreeze, or other
pollutants.) What other
benefits might come from a
dye trace experiment?
Pollution
122 • W ater in the Environment
Pollution
Water in the Environment • 123
Pollution
124 • W ater in the Environment
marshall gaines
(347 posts)delusion is getting epidemic because people have no where to hide anymore, good luck sir!
marshall gaines
(347 posts)This is not speculation,this is probable fact. The corporatists live in a delusional state, we here in the trenches have to live the horrible reality. Thanks peace patriot, succinctly put.
LongTomH
(8,636 posts)For real change to occur, people need to realize the world we could have, as well as the dangers that we face. We could have it all, or we could lose it all.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,161 posts)The state will start building storage facilities for debris generated by the March 2011 tsunami as early as May at two locations in a coastal area of Naraha town, Fukushima Prefecture, Environment Ministry and town officials said Saturday. [...]
If more than 100,000 becquerels of radioactive cesium are found per kilogram of debris, the debris will be transferred to a medium-term storage facility to be built by the state. But if burnable debris contains 100,000 becquerels of radioactive cesium or less, it may be disposed of at a temporary incinerator to be built within the prefecture, according to the officials.
Within the 20-km-radius no-go zone spanning across Naraha and five other municipalities along the coast, debris caused by the magnitude 9.0 quake and the subsequent tsunami has amounted to an estimated 474,000 tons, much of remaining where it is.
http://enenews.com/just-in-fukushima-will-start-burning-radioactive-waste-100000-bqkg-to-be-incinerated-1-billion-pounds-of-debris-in-exclusion-zone-mainichi
davidthegnome
(2,983 posts)Thanks for your post, it was very informative.... and scary.
marshall gaines
(347 posts)thank you for reliable confirmation of a potentially fatal situation for humankind
Dead_Parrot
(14,478 posts)...but a typical medical scan has a dose of about 20,000 microcuries. They tend not to kill people.
MadHound
(34,179 posts)Using an alpha emitter, whose radiation is easily shielded by paper, or skin.
However ingesting and/or inhaling a gamma emitter, such as Cesium, is a whole other matter. You have no shielding inside your body. And please note, in my post I specified inhalation and/or ingestion as the problem.
You inhale/ingest a gamma emitter, well, they tend to kill people.
Dead_Parrot
(14,478 posts)by definition, not blocked by the skin. And yes, too much can kill you but not the amounts you are talking about.
Seriously, follow the link.
bananas
(27,509 posts)Prometheus Bound
(3,489 posts)If food we now harvest from the North Pacific Ocean, from Japan, Korea, Taiwan, parts of China and Russia, and the Western parts of Canada and the U.S. were to become too dangerous to eat it would be a catastrophe beyond imagination.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)In order to contaminate food enough to be dangerous, you need a high concentration of material. But a high concentration limits the area of exposure.
The ~32 million square miles of the northern half of the Pacific is an immense area. And that's just the ocean part of your disaster scenario. Grind up the reactor contents into a fine powder and sprinkle it over that entire area, and you won't reach dangerous concentrations. The area is just too vast and the volume too enormous.
Now, that doesn't mean there can't be localized areas which become too dangerous. I'd be pretty nervous if I was a farmer or fisherman in Japan, for example. And it's not impossible that an absolutely perfect storm could carry radioactive material to the fishery off Alaska. But that same storm won't be able to reach "Korea, Taiwan, parts of China, the Western parts of Canada and the U.S". Contaminating each of those locations would require their own "perfect storm", which would prevent exposure to the other areas.
progressoid
(53,179 posts)Fukushima is a huge problem with horrible, long term consequences, but end of the world rhetoric is off-putting.
chervilant
(8,267 posts)rhetoric is off-putting! Our pathetic, hedonistic, narcissistic species assuredly prefers not to hear that our hubris has measurable consequences!
We are now living in exponential times. Each and every one of our species' missteps is amplified to levels we have yet to comprehend! We've not even had sufficient time to adjust mentally and emotionally to exponential change!
Those of us who have been actively anti-nuclear since the early 70s have long expressed our concerns about a nuclear catastrophe like Fukushima. At present, I am far less offended by 'hyperbolic rhetoric' than I am by the red herrings promulgated by TEPCO, the IAEA, and the Corporate Megalomaniacs who've usurped our media, our politics, and our global economy.
LiberalEsto
(22,845 posts)
Duppers
(28,469 posts)dixiegrrrrl
(60,161 posts)If approved by the DOE, the plan is for Missouri to become the home base for the construction and distribution of smaller nuclear reactors throughout the world. Based on Westinghouse's AP 1000 model large reactors, these new reactors would have about 1/5 the energy output and would be designed to replace aging coal-burning electric plants. Westinghouse officials say these smaller reactors can be produced in less than half the time of larger, traditional reactors and are designed for easy rail transportation.
...snip...
If successful in its federal funding pursuit, the new reactors would be constructed at the site of Ameren's Callaway Nuclear Generating plant in CallawayCounty, bringing new jobs to Mid-Missouri.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/112712426
chervilant
(8,267 posts)in our species' exponential rush to extinction. Anti-nuke activism has been somewhat relevant in curtailing profligate construction of nuclear reactors. Educating the Hoi Polloi about the expense and dangers...whole 'nother story.
fascisthunter
(29,381 posts)AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)fascisthunter
(29,381 posts)or how about a population press their governments to move away from nukes.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Markets are moving to renewables, as they are cheaper and more flexible. You just can't build a nuclear power plant these days. It consistently goes nowhere.
fascisthunter
(29,381 posts)dixiegrrrrl
(60,161 posts)"If approved by the DOE, the plan is for Missouri to become the home base for the construction and distribution of smaller nuclear reactors throughout the world. Based on Westinghouse's AP 1000 model large reactors, these new reactors would have about 1/5 the energy output and would be designed to replace aging coal-burning electric plants. Westinghouse officials say these smaller reactors can be produced in less than half the time of larger, traditional reactors and are designed for easy rail transportation.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002572128#post94
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Still doesn't address a lot of issues like major earthquake, etc.
Granted, smaller reactor means smaller potential disaster, but that's not a great selling point.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,161 posts)Despite all the critical issues with nuke plants, some people are focusing on making money with them, no matter what.
obxhead
(8,434 posts)on a global scale.
"Fate of the world" does not automatically assume life will be wiped out. I would say a rise in cancer rates globally from fallout would be a horrible fate.
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)Last edited Tue Apr 17, 2012, 09:37 PM - Edit history (2)
...for posting videos and articles here at DU, even though you've been here way long enough to figure that out. That protocol states that we're to include the exact title (for legal and other reasons) of what it is one is posting. If you had bothered to click the link you would have seen that this is what I did, and you could have saved yourself this embarrassment and looking ridiculous in the process.
It is also clear to me that you have no idea what the word "fate" means.
- I don't know what to tell you to do about that, other than to buy yourself a dictionary......
who made you an expert? do you have credentials to backup this bs?
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)I don't know what to do with this. I will sit and look at it. I may never see another.
allan01
(1,950 posts)I hope tepco is found criminaly liabe and all the execs shot for commitings crimes against humanity. lyin so and sos
marshall gaines
(347 posts)i'd volunteer for the firing squad
Permanut
(8,391 posts)Thanks to all who have contributed.
malaise
(296,114 posts)nuclear power is safe!
DLevine
(1,791 posts)
bvar22
(39,909 posts)You are all running around like Luddite little Henny Pennys.
I know "Science" and you are stupid.
These modern plants are "engineered" to withstand natural Disasters and Terrorist Attacks!
Did I mention I know "science"?
These plants are perfectly SAFE,
even if they are built on active Earthquake Faults,
close to Oceans & Fisheries,
because They have redundant back up systems!!!
There is absolutely NOTHING for you all to worry your dumb little heads about,
because I KNOW SCIENCE!!!
Now go back to your homes and let the grownups who know Science do their jobs.
madokie
(51,076 posts)U R spot on
marshall gaines
(347 posts)crawl back in that hole you emerged from please!
SammyWinstonJack
(44,316 posts) 
Oh and...a cowardly Democrat Party?
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)I'm SO relieved to know the "scientists" have it under control
and I can return to my comfortable state of denial!
and good luck...
BHN 
dixiegrrrrl
(60,161 posts)will not get your tone, and will take it seriously, because the obvious sarcasm thingy is not visible.
at least one
proably more
bvar22
(39,909 posts)At least one new poster ^ seems to have taken me at face value,
This is certainly one of those things that you had to be here to understand.
There are many new posters at DU3 who probably won't get It.
I really should use the "sarcasm" label for the benefit of the new members,
and those old members who are sarcasm/irony impaired,
but I love satire that sits on the edge of "Is he serious?"
That usually provokes more reflection.
You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]
PearliePoo2
(7,768 posts)Humans and their existing robots can't function in Fukushima's destroyed reactor's radioactive environment.
The tools and technology to deal with these multiple meltdowns haven't even been invented yet.
Remember also, this area is being jarred by Earthquakes on almost a daily basis.
flamingdem
(40,891 posts)God knows how many cancers could be avoided by acting before the site is so contaminated it is impossible to inhabit at all!
Real nice for the West Coast, just great, but keep eating your organic food, very expensive even with added cesium.
Uncle Joe
(65,136 posts)Thanks for the thread, DeSwiss.
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)flamingdem
(40,891 posts)Narrator: Yukitero Naka and his people know what is really happening in the nuclear ruins. [...] Even if they were able to create enough qualified engineers and staff for the next 40 years, one problem remains that could change Japan and the world.
Question: Is the nuclear power plant safe now?
Yukitero Naka, Nuclear Engineer: Well, that’s what TEPCO and the government says, but the people in there don’t believe it.
There is still a great danger.
My personal concern is the fourth reactor block.
The building has been strongly damaged by the earthquake.
There are approximately 1300 spent fuel rods in the cooling pond on level four. In the level above newer rods are stored as well as a lot of heavy machinery. This is all very, very heavy.
If another earthquake occurs then the building could collapse and another chain reaction could very likely occur.
Narrator: So, a meltdown under the free sky which would be the end of Japan as we know it today.
The radiation would be direct deadly.
The work on the ground would be totally impossible.
The most likely consequence is that reactors 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 get out of control.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)...
I really don't like to be a downer, but this is really scary...
flamingdem
(40,891 posts)the most terrifying real life "thriller" or is it horror movie?
It's critical that someone steps up to help Japan, the problem has always been
that Tepco and the powerful board limit the effectiveness of outside help... that
plus the fact a worker can get zapped in a short time period.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)"The United States has thirty-one boiling water reactors with pools elevated several stories above ground, similar to those at Dai-Ichi. As in Japan, all spent fuel pools at nuclear power plants do not have steel-lined, concrete barriers that cover reactor vessels to prevent the escape of radioactivity. They are not required to have back-up generators to keep used fuel rods cool if offsite power is lost."
http://www.presstv.ir/usdetail/185667.html
And this is a tip of the iceberg.
AllyCat
(18,842 posts)by it's failings/risks. Maybe we don't all need our lights on all the time, the a/c running at 64 degrees in the summer, and need to look for cleaner sources of energy. Those big windmills are looking pretty good right now.
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)Is that a Japanese car? 
WillyT
(72,631 posts) & Rec !!!
spanone
(141,616 posts)marshall gaines
(347 posts)what a mess! man, his technology, his arrogance+stupidity=death for all of us.
fascisthunter
(29,381 posts)Zax2me
(2,515 posts)Fate of the WHOLE WORLD.
Lighten up, Francis.
fascisthunter
(29,381 posts)leftyohiolib
(5,917 posts)Safetykitten
(5,162 posts)bit of radiation?
Duppers
(28,469 posts)This is too important to be ignored.
I'm feeling rather livid and helpless here.
AsahinaKimi
(20,776 posts)Chiri mo tsumoreba yama to naru
LongTomH
(8,636 posts)At least, it's getting attention from various media sources.
From Huffington Post: Fukushima's Nuclear Nightmare is Far from Over
Sen. Ron Wyden toured the Fukushima plant and reported back on the dangers it continues to pose:
Political News: New After Tour of Fukushima Nuclear Power Station Wyden Says Situation Worse Than Reported
The Wall Street Journal Japan: Fukushima Daiichi's Achilles Heel: Unit 4's Spent Fuel?
Reuters: Fukushima damage leaves spent fuel at risk-US lawmaker
Excerpts from the Reuters article:
snip//
snip//
Mnemosyne
(21,363 posts)
RainDog
(28,784 posts)shimonitanegi
(114 posts)It will be very problematic.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21328535.600-japans-2011-megaquake-reactivated-dormant-faults.html
BeHereNow
(17,162 posts)I don't like what I'm reading tonight about reactor 4 and other threads related to
this situation.
Don't like it one bit.
BHN
ErikJ
(6,335 posts)to the southern hemisphere. Next year hopefully.
unionworks
(3,574 posts)...in fire your faith shall be repaid..."