It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Start stocking Up on water and Canned food guys...

page: 8
47
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 19 2015 @ 10:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: pfishy
a reply to: engineercutout

I can certainly understand your 'follow the money' argument, but what exactly do you mean by neutralizing the waste? Are you talking about a safe storage method, or neutralizing the material's radioactivity?

I was referring during the rant in my second post in this thread to the various theories on transmutation that I've encountered in my research. Mostly cold fusion type stuff, usually postulating fusions of the radioactive elements into more stable elements. It would not surprise me to learn that one or more of those methods may actually be viable. Hard to say for sure either way, having not done the experimentation.


Also, you mentioned in the post previous to this one that molten salt reactors were an option. An option to what, exactly?

Well, I placed it in the category of more conventional approaches, being aimed at waste management in general. If I understand the proposed uses I've encountered in my research so far, molten salt reactors hold promise in the arena of waste processing. You could dissolve some high level waste in a molten salt bath, simplifying the process of recycling them by melting and refusing them into a form that would facilitate powder metallurgy.

Powder metallurgy for the layfolks being processing the metals as chemicals dissolved in solution. Instead of having to melt this stuff down in a furnace and re-form it, which is going to seriously irradiate the equipment and the immediate environment around it during the process, you dissolve those metals and salts into a solution in water or some other solvent, and your reprocessing consists of a solution reaction that creates a lot less contamination in the process. Pouring two beakers full of liquid together, instead of melting it in a furnace that you contaminate in the process. I've only looked at it briefly so far, so I could be missing the mark, but I tthought that was what they were getting at. Feel free to clarify if you have a better understanding of the topic and you think I am in error.

While I think molten salt reactors may hold promise in the arena of waste management, I am in no way advocating their widespread adoption. I've been following the discussion on the so-called "inherent safety" of such reactors, and I tend to side with the critics. We are still talking about some very volatile, highly toxic substances here, with their own set of containment challenges. I don't want one of those in every other neighborhood, I really don't. LFTR: Liquid Flouride Thorium Reactor. Highly toxic radioactive metal packaged up with large portions of the most reactive element on the periodic table. I think I'll pass on that for now. They are still very dangerous, just in a different way.
edit on 19-8-2015 by engineercutout because: edit




posted on Aug, 19 2015 @ 11:47 AM
link   
Ok, I see what you were saying now.
Yeah, transmutation holds possibilities, but I really don't think the technology is there. And MSR's do have a greater inherent safety factor than light water reactors, especially in the handling of contaminated coolant since solids are far easier to contain than liquids.



posted on Aug, 30 2015 @ 07:05 PM
link   
a reply to: zinuru I personally think it is bad to read about how they are unloading all this trash from the ocean to Alaska I think there are loads being shipped from Seattle. They say it isn't even scratching the surface on needing to clean up old fishing nets and debris. Scary!!! Don't think it good to read about spillage of any kind in the ocean either. Fukashima, lol hope spelled right, we had that scare with the earthquake, that is still a real threat to happen again. The best thing to do is keep an eye out for quakes though is when Papua New Guinea gets those mags over 4, than it likes to spread out to the hot zones with bigger quakes. If it hits in Virgin Islands over 3 mag. pretty much guaranteed to get quakes in the NW location, usually hits Washington, Oregon, Canada region, although with these big quakes of recent hit Idaho. We have repeated patterns going so wouldn't be surprised if destructive forces hit again in the Mariana Islands region at over 6 mag's soon. There is a conspiracy that fracking is caused by underground manmade tunnels, which they believe is causing the quakes hitting Kansas and Oklahoma location, but it is right on with the energy moving around California, floating everywhere on the Andrias fault, that pushes up against Nevada, energy travels to Oklahoma and Kansas, it also travels to Irvine TX. I wouldn't want to live in Oklahoma or California right now, lets just say that. I would prepare for the little quakes that cause destructive damage.



posted on Aug, 30 2015 @ 07:05 PM
link   
a reply to: zinuru I personally think it is bad to read about how they are unloading all this trash from the ocean to Alaska I think there are loads being shipped from Seattle. They say it isn't even scratching the surface on needing to clean up old fishing nets and debris. Scary!!! Don't think it good to read about spillage of any kind in the ocean either. Fukashima, lol hope spelled right, we had that scare with the earthquake, that is still a real threat to happen again. The best thing to do is keep an eye out for quakes though is when Papua New Guinea gets those mags over 4, than it likes to spread out to the hot zones with bigger quakes. If it hits in Virgin Islands over 3 mag. pretty much guaranteed to get quakes in the NW location, usually hits Washington, Oregon, Canada region, although with these big quakes of recent hit Idaho. We have repeated patterns going so wouldn't be surprised if destructive forces hit again in the Mariana Islands region at over 6 mag's soon. There is a conspiracy that fracking is caused by underground manmade tunnels, which they believe is causing the quakes hitting Kansas and Oklahoma location, but it is right on with the energy moving around California, floating everywhere on the Andrias fault, that pushes up against Nevada, energy travels to Oklahoma and Kansas, it also travels to Irvine TX. I wouldn't want to live in Oklahoma or California right now, lets just say that. I would prepare for the little quakes that cause destructive damage.



posted on Aug, 30 2015 @ 07:05 PM
link   
a reply to: zinuru I personally think it is bad to read about how they are unloading all this trash from the ocean to Alaska I think there are loads being shipped from Seattle. They say it isn't even scratching the surface on needing to clean up old fishing nets and debris. Scary!!! Don't think it good to read about spillage of any kind in the ocean either. Fukashima, lol hope spelled right, we had that scare with the earthquake, that is still a real threat to happen again. The best thing to do is keep an eye out for quakes though is when Papua New Guinea gets those mags over 4, than it likes to spread out to the hot zones with bigger quakes. If it hits in Virgin Islands over 3 mag. pretty much guaranteed to get quakes in the NW location, usually hits Washington, Oregon, Canada region, although with these big quakes of recent hit Idaho. We have repeated patterns going so wouldn't be surprised if destructive forces hit again in the Mariana Islands region at over 6 mag's soon. There is a conspiracy that fracking is caused by underground manmade tunnels, which they believe is causing the quakes hitting Kansas and Oklahoma location, but it is right on with the energy moving around California, floating everywhere on the Andrias fault, that pushes up against Nevada, energy travels to Oklahoma and Kansas, it also travels to Irvine TX. I wouldn't want to live in Oklahoma or California right now, lets just say that. I would prepare for the little quakes that cause destructive damage.



posted on Aug, 30 2015 @ 07:30 PM
link   
The levels of radiation are so small that it would barely show as background radiation by the time it reaches you.

Bit alarmist to start stocking up on water and canned goods over this.



posted on Aug, 30 2015 @ 07:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: zinuru
a reply to: Chrisfishenstein

Why is fukishima a taboo topic?



Because 99% of what people post here about Fukushima is bs, nonsense, fantasy, doomsday inspired ignorance lacking any ACTUAL understanding of radioactive contamination, half-life, isotopes, etc.

For clarification:



The becquerel (symbol Bq) (pronounced: /ˈbɛkərɛl/ BEK-ə-rel) is the SI derived unit of radioactivity. One Bq is defined as the activity of a quantity of radioactive material in which one nucleus decays per second.


A becquerel is a unit of measurement related to the mass and half-life of a radioactive material, but your source won't want you to know that, because that's reality isn't terrifying or doomsday enough to get those links and clicks.


Try reading some REAL science some time, rather than this tabloid bs designed to dupe you.



posted on Aug, 30 2015 @ 07:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Chrisfishenstein

originally posted by: woogleuk
Whilst the ongoing contamination isn't good, I don't think we are at panic stations just yet, nor should we be at all.

The ocean is rather large, by the time any of the nasties have gotten a few miles from Fukushima they are diluted to a point where it shouldn't really be much of a concern.



So let's just leave it alone right? There is lots of water to take care of that.....


No concerns here.....


No, and that's why billions upon billions of $'s are being spent on cleaning up the mess.
It's not a choice of doing absolutely nothing or losing our minds based on paranoid delusions about the end-times.

There is a SENSIBLE middle ground here, one based in reality and on actual science rather than the ignorant and lazy opinions of of teenagers in their bedrooms whose only awareness of Nuclear science is "radiation bad!"

This is extremely complex science, but it's easy enough to understand with a little reading. The problem is that too many people these days can't be bothered to actually research anything before they start losing their sh*t and embarrassing themselves by repeating utter bs.

Too much of what is taken as science and truth on this forum is nothing more than link-bait, and people are too idiotic to bother looking into anything before they post it as a source.



posted on Oct, 16 2015 @ 12:46 AM
link   
About time something happens to get the world's priorities straight.



posted on Oct, 16 2015 @ 06:04 AM
link   
Does anyone know the half life of the radiation leaking into the Pacific? Knowing that would give some of us an idea as to how bad it is, or not, it depends on the half life. (Time to do a bit of googling).



posted on Oct, 16 2015 @ 06:13 AM
link   
a reply to: zinuru

I agree ANY radiation being allowed to continuously spew into the oceans for years is always going to be bad...how bad though is not something i claim to know one way or the other...but we can all agree it's very bad.

Although i'm confused as to why you would lump 'gay marriage' into your warnings of doom and collapse?

Do you seriously think the way people choose their Husbands and Wives, partners, lovers or best friends and whether or not they make love to those people, regardless of which sets of reproductive organs they were born with, has some portend of doom attached to it?

I mean, come on...if alternative sexual practices were a reason for our collective doom, the priesthood would have brought the end of Humanity centuries ago!



posted on Oct, 17 2015 @ 12:22 AM
link   
a reply to: pikestaff




Does anyone know the half life of the radiation leaking into the Pacific?

Choose an isotope then go from there.



posted on Oct, 17 2015 @ 06:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Plutonium for 24000 alex
edit on 17-10-2015 by dashen because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 02:25 AM
link   
Why is fukishima a taboo topic?



posted on Jul, 4 2016 @ 09:46 PM
link   




posted on Jul, 4 2016 @ 11:09 PM
link   
a reply to: zinuru


When all is said and done, U238 is in the soil of Earth leaching out into the water, we concentrate it and make it into nuclear fuel. In Fukishima its concentrated, but the soil its concentrated from is no longer leaching, so in reality is the general leakage into the water any more than what would be leaking normally? correct me if the logic is flawed.



posted on Feb, 19 2017 @ 12:04 AM
link   
Raise hand, science illiterate person here. If I understand your post, the ocean can absorb the bad elements from Fukishima? What about the sea life? doc truyen hay



posted on Feb, 19 2017 @ 03:26 AM
link   
a reply to: zinuru


Well off people do not riot, its all to do with the Fractional reserve banking system. It has a use by date, and that is when the interest on the debt reaches a point, when enough people cant pay the interest. At that point it collapses just like any other Ponzi system. If the jobs disappear it just happens sooner. This is a great little vid. that explains what happens. The system we have at the moment is reaching the end game.www.youtube.com...

Everyone just looks The Dow but its the Credit defaults that tell the real story, when enough sub prime defaults collapse, the SHTF occurs. Obama passed the buck, so it wouldn't happen on his watch.


edit on 19-2-2017 by anonentity because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2017 @ 05:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: woogleuk
Whilst the ongoing contamination isn't good, I don't think we are at panic stations just yet, nor should we be at all.

The ocean is rather large, by the time any of the nasties have gotten a few miles from Fukushima they are diluted to a point where it shouldn't really be much of a concern.



Radiation gets diluted? so why is even low level radiation stored in steel barrels inside concrete pits? Radiation does not get 'diluted' the isotope 'decays' over time, some isotopes take over 250,000 years to decay to a 'safe' level, they do not dilute.



posted on Feb, 19 2017 @ 05:45 AM
link   
as a public service announcement : please check the " use by " date of those emergency stores you bought in august 2015



new topics

top topics



 
47
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join