Scary Common Ground

Scary Common Ground (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

OrionTheWolf -> Scary Common Ground (6/20/2011 5:41:27 AM)
Administrations from both parties have ignored a dangerous situation for years. Let's bring our focus closer to home. "Federal regulators have been working closely with the nuclear power industry to keep the nation's aging reactors operating within safety standards by repeatedly weakening those standards, or simply failing to enforce them, an investigation by The Associated Press has found." Read more: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/06/20/national/main20072497.shtml#ixzz1PorPupe4

Owner59 -> RE: Scary Common Ground (6/20/2011 5:43:18 AM)
Shut them down and stop throwing good money after bad.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Scary Common Ground (6/20/2011 7:29:00 AM)
I agree, but apparently this has been going on a long time, and through different administrations. I know the Japanese can be leaders in some industries, but I don't want to follow their recent examples. Did you see the picture of the valve?

DarkSteven -> RE: Scary Common Ground (6/20/2011 7:50:25 AM)
Read Feynmann's book What Do You care What Other People Think? He describes the exact same bullshit that led up to the Challenger disaster - thoughtful, conservative safety measures continually ignored/weakened.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Scary Common Ground (6/20/2011 8:02:38 AM)
I wonder what New Jersey will think of one of those "Challenger" accidents with the poer plant there. I have looked and cannot find any administration in recent years addressing these issues. In fact, it appears that the commision has used a lot of legal staff to keep things from being seen or reported. Why worry about terrorism when we treat ourselves like this?

Anarrus -> RE: Scary Common Ground (6/20/2011 8:06:07 AM)
FR Just a few tidbits for thought.... In 2011, Benjamin K. Sovacool said that: "When the full nuclear fuel cycle is considered - not only reactors but also uranium mines and mills, enrichment facilities, spent fuel repositories, and decommissioning sites - nuclear power proves to be one of the costliest sources of energy".[65] The Union of Concerned Scientists have stated that "reactor owners ... have never been economically responsible for the full costs and risks of their operations. Instead, the public faces the prospect of severe losses in the event of any number of potential adverse scenarios, while private investors reap the rewards if nuclear plants are economically successful. For all practical purposes, nuclear power’s economic gains are privatized, while its risks are socialized".[41] Both are from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_of_new_nuclear_power_plants. Nuclear power is an albatross put in place by the good ol boys and fed to maintain the status quo.

defiantbadgirl -> RE: Scary Common Ground (6/20/2011 9:26:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 Shut them down and stop throwing good money after bad. I agree they should be shut down. Permanently. First Cheranobyl, then Japan and Nebraska. I'm terrified of nuclear power plants. I'll never understand why some people would rather risk toxic radiation exposure and waste that stays deadly for hundreds of years than use wind, water, and solar power. For those who think windmills are ugly, I'm sure there are ways to make them more visually appealing.

DomKen -> RE: Scary Common Ground (6/20/2011 9:35:16 AM)
Hopefully what happened at Fukushima will wake some people up. Even if we shut down all the US plants, the right thing to do, we still have a huge quantity of highly radioactive spent fuel that needs to be dealt with.

joether -> RE: Scary Common Ground (6/20/2011 10:27:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Hopefully what happened at Fukushima will wake some people up. Even if we shut down all the US plants, the right thing to do, we still have a huge quantity of highly radioactive spent fuel that needs to be dealt with. Not only do you have highly radioactive nuclear fuel, but you have to guard it. The amount of security that must be paid for the plant itself also has an near equal amount that must be spent on the 'spent' fuel; least it were to be to stolen and used as a 'dirty bomb'. Pro-nuclear folks have made claims that this is just a 'cost' of having cheap energy for everyone. Yes, that 'cheap' energy has been pushed by the GOP for decades now. Its ironic, that the group most wishing to cut spending, wants spending increased for nuclear plants to be built, maintained and spent fuel facilities created/manned. Since how long will it take one of those spent fuel rods to cease being nuclear? Oh a few thousand years.... ....and our country will be paying for it the whole time. Year after year, decade after decade. Seems conservatives want to pay for welfare on nuclear material but not for their fellow humans.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Scary Common Ground (6/20/2011 12:43:48 PM)
The OP is about the fact that the power plants have had safety regs changed to not be as strict so they would pass, or not enforced. This has happened across many different administrations, democrat and republican alike. So how does everyone feel about moving to Nebraska?

MasterSlaveLA -> RE: Scary Common Ground (6/20/2011 4:05:30 PM)
1) I don't have an issue with Nuclear Power. 2) If the "safety standards" have been lowered and/or the reactors need service, then create a schedule to power one down, repair it, power it up again, then move on to the next. 3) According to this site, less than 20% of our power comes from Nuclear sources. So, I'd think taking down a few at a time to service them shouldn't be a huge deal. (shrugs) *quote:* Percent of total U.S. electricity generation in 2010: 19.6% or 807.0 billion kilowatt-hours (bkWh). http://www.nei.org/resourcesandstats/nuclear_statistics/usnuclearpowerplants/

Louve00 -> RE: Scary Common Ground (6/20/2011 5:04:47 PM)
I agree that they don't provide the bulk of the energy the U.S. uses, but I don't think taking them down for repair is the issue. It's cost, and de-regulation that is endangering us all. I would bet it's not just NJ's problem, but NY's as well, and even GA was mentioned. For that matter there are 2 nuclear power plants in Florida and I'm too afraid to know what they've loosened regulations on for them down here. The disrepair of any one of these reactors, which are spread thru out our country can cause some serious, long-term effects to people without them even knowing it. That's the scary part to me! Couple that with the book DarkSteven mentioned and seeing the documentary on how they let the Challenger go up, knowing what the results could be. At the risk of lives, they let it go anyway. Will they use the same logic and will they be as willing to gamble the lives of many, many, many more people? I think so. I think it's time to write our congressmen and start letting people be aware of this problem...unless we're all willing to let this neglect and de-regulation affect us. Even the reactors that are shut down will erode in time. And even those reactors that are shut down still house their spent fuel cells. And those spent fuel cells are just as radioactive as fuel cells that make electricity.

Termyn8or -> RE: Scary Common Ground (6/20/2011 5:18:20 PM)
FR What about France ? They don't seem to have much in the way of problems. T^T

MasterSlaveLA -> RE: Scary Common Ground (6/20/2011 5:30:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Louve00 I agree that they don't provide the bulk of the energy the U.S. uses, but I don't think taking them down for repair is the issue. It's cost, and de-regulation... 1) What's the "cost"... do you know -- i don't??? As an aside, while certainly 20% of power is not a huge amount, it ain't peanuts either, yanno? 2) I agree they should NOT be loosening any safety standards.

Louve00 -> RE: Scary Common Ground (6/20/2011 5:33:00 PM)
I have no idea what the cost is, but there has to be a reason they keep loosening safety regulations on something so powerful. I would hate to think they're loosening regulations because they're too lazy to make the necessary repairs!!

MasterSlaveLA -> RE: Scary Common Ground (6/20/2011 6:31:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Louve00 I would hate to think they're loosening regulations because they're too lazy to make the necessary repairs!! As would I. In light of what happened in Japan, I could understand strengthening safety regulations, not loosening them?!! OOF!!!

Louve00 -> RE: Scary Common Ground (6/20/2011 7:03:27 PM)
LOL...I feel the same. OOF!! Unfortunate for those poor Japanese people, they live in a portion of the world called the "Ring of Fire". It is prone to the kind of natural disasters that happened there. In fact, when they were pointing out all the locations of the U.S reactors, one is frighteningly close to a fault in CA. But one natural disaster is as good as any other (I would think, but could be wrong) to put stress and strain on those plants in need of repair. People are so quick to scream about regulations, yet, in instances such as this, big disasters happen in the absence of regulation. It just makes me think its obvious no regulations (or little regulation...or regulation set to accommodate an entity can be a danger to a lot of people. I'm not saying regulate people and operations to the point of micromanagement. I'm just saying lets do things right and keep us all safe. If we can't do that on our own accord, then hell yea, regulate it!! [8D]

Aneirin -> RE: Scary Common Ground (6/20/2011 7:17:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Termyn8or FR What about France ? They don't seem to have much in the way of problems. T^T Good point, they don't Why ?

Termyn8or -> RE: Scary Common Ground (6/20/2011 9:10:24 PM)
Why ? First of all because they don't have alot of natural disasters. That makes it a good place for things that do not tolerate natural disasters. But I would suspect that they might have some sort of work ethic, instead of feeling like slaves they tend to do the job right. Remember Chernobyl and Three Mile Island were not caused by earthquakes. In the US at least, most people are lazy and prone to take shortcuts, and this is from top to bottom. That is part of the reason this country is so litigatious. People have to be held responsible - FOR WHAT ? If they did the damn job right in the first place there would be no blame to set upon anyone. I don't know about Japan. Japan for a time srtrove to supply the best products available, partly in light of the fact that competition was coming from China, Indonesia and who knows where. For about a decade or so a Japanese product was the best damn thing you could buy, because of whatever, the gung ho attitude or something. Now they have slipped into the abysimal section of capitalism, where the buck, or yen, is almighty. They have become largely a nation of financiers. No longer the worker intellect, which I do not intend as a putdown. We used to have that. A Man took pride in his work. I remember working under those conditions, and I liked it. Now things are different, it is profit at all cost. If I can pull in a grand in fifteen minutes rather than an hour I will do it, unless one thing stops me. The gamble. What are the odds of something going wrong and beyond that, what are the odds of my company being caught and held culpable for it ? And in the end, what are the chances of all this falling on me personally ? That is the attitude. I have no desire to build nuclear power plants or anything, and I also do not favor shutting them down. So what, some floods. Ain't there insulation on the wires ? Fuck it. And if it blows up, if it happens to kill me fine and of not, I guess I can live with that. Remember what John Belushi said in a skit on SNL "You can't have too much water in the reactor" ? He left and this alarm went off and people were standing around wondering if he meant not to overfill it or to make sure it always has ample water. They started taking a vote on it and just about then the place went up in a mushroom cloud. That is as real as it gets for me, for I am guilty of "Americanism". I just don't care. Blow the fucking thing up, and hope all the good people got out in time. They could build a reactor that could float in the ocean, but our safety is not worth the cost to them. What can I do ? I know what, and I will do exactly that - nothing. Let the fucking thing blow up. It wouldn't have as detrimental an effect on the economy as the shenannigans of the last decade, nowhere near. Human life, it's worth about three bucks a head. T^T

Aneirin -> RE: Scary Common Ground (6/21/2011 4:59:15 AM)
The International nuclear incident scale I referenced in another thread does actually list a few of france's nuclear fuck ups, but you will notice at what level they actually are, one level 4 a partial core meltdown at Saint Laurent Nuclear power plant in 1969 and again 1980 with graphite overheating. Other than that there were two level 1 accidents, one being TNPC in 2008 and Gravelines in 2009; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Nuclear_Event_Scale But why are France's fuck ups so low key, perhaps because they don't make big news, the news networks aren't interested so much about France than say the USA, Russia, Japan, UK etc, perhaps the traditional favourites for media interest Further to that perhaps it is a case of size and date, after Windscale in 1959, it was Three Mile Island in 1979 and Chernobyl in 1986, Fukushima Diiachi of this year became the worst disaster, what next, which country will have one that betters the lot and when, the media are waiting. But I do agree on your comments about work ethic and how that seems to have given way to corner cutting and cost saving exercises, not a nuclear accident but the BP oil disaster that was Deepwater Horizon was attributed to this very thing. So perhaps if work ethic is the common problem in these disasters, perhaps it is this that we should be looking at not scratching our heads thinking what next. Oh, and regards the Chernobyl disaster of 1986, I did not hear about it until a few days after and that because I was backpacking in the English Lake District, camping at tarns and hanging valleys between mountains and putting out pans to catch rainwater to drink. Only when I came down off the tops to seek a pub, the Kirkstone Pass Inn a few days later did I find out about Chernobyl and the warning not to drink the rainwater. Now I live in a part of the country, which features naturally occurring Radon gas. So, as a tobacco user, am I going to die from lung cancer due to smoking, or exposure to ionising radiation, given that radon gas in the second most likely cause of lung cancer and if I wasn't a smoker, I could still get lung cancer and that from where I like many others live in areas of the country, where radon gas is a naturally occurring hazard. But then, I could get hit by a car and die tommorrow.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875