fredgiblet wrote:Fotiadis_110 wrote:Even after what we saw in Japan?
An absurdly outdated design that isn't even in the same league (much less the ballpark) of modern designs getting hit by two of the worst natural disasters in history simultaneously?
For a-sooo outdated design - aren´t there too much of them still around? Especially in the USA?
fredgiblet wrote:I for one am not going to use that as a basis for my opinions.
Keep living in the nuclear stone age. Ze Germans haff zat behind.
Oh, and btw:
WE are/were the nation with the cutting-edge technology. See here:
http://tinyurl.com/3e4ny7q .
Doesn´t look like low-tech, does it?
Though no need for them anymore.
Oh, and btw: Our Chancellor holds a doctorade in nuclear physics and quantum chemistry, so she has probably forgotten more on that topic than all those oh-so sane nukefanboys together will ever
know. Or better:
Believe.
fredgiblet wrote:As I said in the Page 99 thread. We aren't the Russians.
Well, that wasn´t an exclusive problem of them...
I don´t know how old you are, and where you from, but I can still remember all the warning signs "playground closed due to radiation", "Keep off the wood" etc, thanks to Chernobyl... Still, wildpigs from the bavarian and black forest aren´t safe to eat, between 20 and 80% of them are too contaminated and have to be disposed in special facilities. And that´s only one example.
junk wrote:You mean essentially the safest and cleanest power source
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_n ... _incidents
But of course this whole industry is to be trusted, as they always inform truthfully and transparent.
And of course all npp´s worldwide are completely and comfortably insured, and the problem of waste-storage is absolutely solved, with no costs for the next 10.000 generations to come... Oh, wait...
Keep in mind: Plutonium has a half-life of 24k years.
junk wrote:What happened in Japan should have been a realisation for most people just how safe nuclear power plants actually are. as opposed to have instigated another panic attack.
Thank you. I feel soooo much safer and better now.
"Sacrifice your children and grandchildren for the shareholders benefit, worship the golden calf of turbo-nuke-capitalism! Socialize the losses! Disagreeing is un-American!!1! And un-Christian!!!1!!11!!!!"
Arioch wrote:I don't see how anyone who pretends to be serious about "sustainable" or "clean" energy sources can omit nuclear power as a serious option
You call our chancellor and our industry insane?
Arioch wrote:The hysteria over the Fukushima failures following the horrific 2011 Japanese tsunami overlooks the fact that in a disaster that claimed some 20,000 lives, not a single death from radiation exposure has yet been recorded.
IIRC i count at least two from the cleanup crew who got several sievert from that puddle. And several hundred claimed by PTSD and related suicides.
But they´re still better off than the ten-thousands who are suffering from losing their homes and their former lives.
And for the body-count: Just wait and see - radioactivity kills slowly.
Arioch wrote:And wind turbines also have significant environmental impact -- in addition to cluttering the landscape, they actually slow the winds in the areas where they are set up (there literally is no such thing as a free lunch). Wind is still a very viable supplement in certain areas, but it's still not a primary energy source... the power stops when the wind stops blowing.
You want to get informed about wind-energy. Urgently.
A russian scientist once said that one chernobyl wouldn´t be enough to make people think, but rather half-a-dozen of them.
I sadly think he´s still wrong.