Environment & Energy

jeff47

(26,549 posts)

41. So, you'd prefer to blatently ignore the critical difference

Thu May 24, 2012, 01:43 PM

May 2012

Good to see we liberals are so science-oriented and open minded.

Again, lack of a material to absorb the neutrons and stop the chain reaction makes the situations completely different.

If your scenario was correct, naturally-occurring uranium would be exploding all over the planet. Perhaps the fact that this isn't happening might indicate there's a difference.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

103 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I have a question about nuclear weapons. Anyone here know much about them? [View all] GreenPartyVoter May 2012 OP

As happened in the last billion or so years I would think things would re-evolve until Lint Head May 2012 #1

This seems to be the likeliest scenario. GreenPartyVoter May 2012 #6

From what I have read, the missiles will just sit there. It's the reactors that might pose a problem Ian David May 2012 #2

Well, it's reassuring to know we won't be able to blow things up any more. But yeah, the ability GreenPartyVoter May 2012 #5

A similar question might be: Who tends to the nuclear powerplant meltdowns when the grid falls? villager May 2012 #3

Yes, exactly. We have all kinds of infrastructure that is far from benign. It will certainly GreenPartyVoter May 2012 #4

When the grid fails, the graphite rods drop into the reactor, shutting it down TrogL May 2012 #8

That's what happened at Fukushima - fuel rods keep generating heat even with control rods inserted bananas May 2012 #24

A year later and they STILL have to pump cooling water into the reactors and spent fuel pools. nt bananas May 2012 #26

Some recent news stories about how necessary cooling water is after the plant is "shut down" bananas May 2012 #28

Not GRAPHITE!!! PamW May 2012 #33

When "the grid falls" there's no reason to keep running the reactor. jeff47 May 2012 #10

National Geographic has a less apologetic view of nuclear power, addressing the stored fuel rods villager May 2012 #20

As we've seen in Fukushima... caraher May 2012 #21

Exactly. Indeed, in these "aftermath" specials, they seem to think natural forces would "scrub away" villager May 2012 #22

No control rods in your scenario jeff47 May 2012 #37

Again, I will take the National Geographic scenario over yours villager May 2012 #40

So, you'd prefer to blatently ignore the critical difference jeff47 May 2012 #41

You didn't actually read National Geo's thesis, did you? villager May 2012 #43

You didn't actually read my posts, did you? jeff47 May 2012 #47

Yes, but even if plants survive safely their fuel will not. I realize all is hunky-dory in nuke land villager May 2012 #50

You should stop making dumb assumptions about other posters. jeff47 May 2012 #54

Ah, the "reality" card. villager May 2012 #57

Yes, reality jeff47 May 2012 #61

Fukushima is a "localized" disaster? villager May 2012 #64

Again, reality rears it's ugly head jeff47 May 2012 #66

"Again, reality rears its ugly head" villager May 2012 #83

Perhaps I can answer for you PamW May 2012 #77

It depends on the plant jeff47 May 2012 #79

WRONG!!!! WRONG!!! WRONG!!! PamW May 2012 #85

The reactor continues generating decay heat which can destroy the containment in hours bananas May 2012 #25

Why do you make a series of one-sentence replies? jeff47 May 2012 #38

Is that going to be in Bill Maher's New Rules segment this week? kristopher May 2012 #39

I'm not interested in banning him or her. jeff47 May 2012 #42

So you think "internet-message-board etiquette" is established by what you like. kristopher May 2012 #44

Perhaps you could provide a positive reason for spamming replies? jeff47 May 2012 #45

See post 44. kristopher May 2012 #48

Why? jeff47 May 2012 #49

A year later and they STILL have to pump cooling water into the reactors and spent fuel pools. bananas May 2012 #27

That's because there are no control rods jeff47 May 2012 #35

Control rods aren't the issue. PamW May 2012 #84

No, you can't ignore it, cooling water still has to be pumped in bananas May 2012 #29

Fukushima has no control rods anymore jeff47 May 2012 #36

"Fukushima has no control rods anymore" villager May 2012 #51

When they had control rods, they were a good safety feature. jeff47 May 2012 #52

"When they had control rods, they were a good safety feature" villager May 2012 #53

Perhaps you could take a moment and realize the alternative you're getting jeff47 May 2012 #55

So now we're talking about coal burning, and not the OP? villager May 2012 #56

You wandered into anti-nuke land. jeff47 May 2012 #59

Um, no. I was sticking to the OP (remember, it's about *nukes* in the aftermath of humankind) villager May 2012 #60

that's where you started. Then you moved on to anti-nuke jeff47 May 2012 #62

again, the OP is about *the disappearance of humankind* villager May 2012 #63

Conversations move on from where they start. jeff47 May 2012 #67

Yes. And on discussion boards like this, they start with the OP. villager May 2012 #68

I see it as just the opposite XemaSab May 2012 #69

XemaSab, do you think they're the only ones saying no hard choices lay aheaD? villager May 2012 #70

You're right, it's everyone XemaSab May 2012 #71

There are some cornucopians among 'em, but I also find many of them to be quite realistic villager May 2012 #72

I cannot answer your question, But I think it an excellent one truedelphi May 2012 #7

I was around when the USSR could have annhilated us, and it turned out to be the sun hitting GreenPartyVoter May 2012 #12

There is no way the human decision-makers have been or will be removed kristopher May 2012 #15

I wish I could believe you, truedelphi May 2012 #16

Take it or leave it. kristopher May 2012 #17

All I know is that even in Arizona, we can't have them in our house, car or on our person. OffWithTheirHeads May 2012 #9

LOL GreenPartyVoter May 2012 #13

Interesting questions SoutherDem May 2012 #11

I will definitely add that to my queue! LOL GreenPartyVoter May 2012 #14

You may want to check out, "Life After People" OKIsItJustMe May 2012 #18

My kids and I loved the "Life After People" series! I don't remember them discussing the GreenPartyVoter May 2012 #19

I don�t recall them specifically addressing them, no OKIsItJustMe May 2012 #23

nuclear missles need constant maintenance or they won't work. provis99 May 2012 #30

Humans are worse than nuclear waste. hunter May 2012 #31

The earth has gone through catastrophes much worse than a few bombs going off GliderGuider May 2012 #32

Actually a good perspective, GG. Though one wonders if the recent methane releases means villager May 2012 #65

Don't worry about nuclear weapons... PamW May 2012 #34

Just wondering SoutherDem May 2012 #46

OFF is OFF PamW May 2012 #58

Thanks, Pam! GreenPartyVoter May 2012 #74

AS to Nuclear Weapons.. happyslug May 2012 #73

Thank you. That all makes perfect sense to me. :^) GreenPartyVoter May 2012 #75

NOT TRUE!! PamW May 2012 #76

The "Weapons" can last, but NOT the Uranium or Plutonium in them happyslug May 2012 #78

WRONG!!!! WRONG!!! WRONG!!! PamW May 2012 #80

You cite some interesting articles happyslug May 2012 #81

Another thing that is NOT classified PamW May 2012 #82

Oh, there's lots of plutonium. AtheistCrusader May 2012 #99

If the human race disappears, there is no one around to care what happens next. FarCenter May 2012 #86

None of our reactors are currently 'walk away safe'. AtheistCrusader May 2012 #87

Argonne's Integral Fast Reactor is inherently safe.. PamW May 2012 #89

Hmm. That's not why Chernobyl exploded... AtheistCrusader May 2012 #90

WRONG - that IS why Chernobyl exploded.. PamW May 2012 #91

I wouldn't call the xenon poisoning 'augmenting'. AtheistCrusader May 2012 #92

Xenon Instability plus a trigger... PamW May 2012 #93

I disagree. AtheistCrusader May 2012 #94

The final event... PamW May 2012 #95

Those pumps were still spinning. AtheistCrusader May 2012 #96

The pumps didn't have to stop... PamW May 2012 #97

The rods moved. AtheistCrusader May 2012 #98

That's part of it. PamW May 2012 #100

I'm afraid I'm going to have to agree to disagree until I see this model. AtheistCrusader May 2012 #101

Let's go through the reactor physics.. PamW Jun 2012 #102

Over-moderated reactors PamW Jun 2012 #103

Hickory Dickory Dock Texas-Limerick May 2012 #88