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.

 

Chernobyl, Fukushima and the Insanity of Nuclear Power

page: 1
16
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 03:09 PM
link   
Today, April 26, we celebrate arguably the greatest of Man's blunders in technology:


The disaster began during a systems test on 26 April 1986 at reactor number four of the Chernobyl plant, which is near the city of Pripyat and in proximity to the administrative border with Belarus and the Dnieper River. There was a sudden and unexpected power surge, and when an emergency shutdown was attempted, an exponentially larger spike in power output occurred, which led to a reactor vessel rupture and a series of steam explosions. These events exposed the graphite moderator of the reactor to air, causing it to ignite.[4] The resulting fire sent a plume of highly radioactive fallout into the atmosphere and over an extensive geographical area, including Pripyat. The plume drifted over large parts of the western Soviet Union and Europe. From 1986 to 2000, 350,400 people were evacuated and resettled from the most severely contaminated areas of Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine.[5][6] According to official post-Soviet data,[7][8] about 60% of the fallout landed in Belarus. Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus have been burdened with the continuing and substantial decontamination and health care costs of the Chernobyl accident...

en.wikipedia.org...

The costs of containment of the disaster continues - the total death count caused by radiation will probably never be known.

But Man is a slow learner:



The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster (福島第一原子力発電所事故 Fukushima Dai-ichi (About this sound pronunciation) genshiryoku hatsudensho jiko?) was an energy accident at the Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant, initiated primarily by the tsunami that was triggered by the Tōhoku earthquake on 11 March 2011.[6] The damage caused by the tsunami produced equipment failures, and without this equipment a loss-of-coolant accident followed, resulting in three nuclear meltdowns and the release of radioactive material beginning on 12 March.[7] It is the largest nuclear disaster since the Chernobyl disaster of 1986 and the second disaster to be given the Level 7 event classification of the International Nuclear Event Scale.....

en.wikipedia.org...

And I would not even guess at the total death count directly and indirectly caused by this one - not to mention the contamination of land and sea - the destruction, costs of this destruction on Man and his environment are huge, to say the least.

These 'safe' Nuclear power plants had safeguards - the public was safe from them, right ?- WRONG !!!

Nuclear power plants are all disasters waiting to happen - " As of July 2015, 30 countries worldwide are operating 438 nuclear reactors for electricity generation and 67 new nuclear plants are under construction in 15 countries." - And everyone of these plants is a disaster waiting to happen.

There is no such thing as a 'safe' nuclear power plant - And the fact that renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, and combined solar wind
technolgy could completely replace them, does not phase an industry whose profit motives come first - and, as a famous entrepreneur of the past
once said "Let the public be damned" - and does not have to answer to accidents and accidents of nature.

Are we all idiots? Are we going to let this insanity continue? Or is it time for the damned public to be heard?

What do you think










"OPERATION NEW DAWN - THE BEGINNING OF THE FUTURE"
universalspacealienpeoplesassociation.blogspot.com...




posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 03:14 PM
link   
a reply to: AlienView




And the fact that renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, and combined solar wind technolgy could completely replace them


I am awaiting the first solar or wind powered submarine





posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 03:20 PM
link   
a reply to: AlienView

Maybe if we weren't so energy hungry we wouldn't need nuclear power. But guess what, the demand got so high that coal, gas, etc couldn't keep up.
You are strawmanning against old, outdated plants, sort of pop up plants to meet energy demands.

Newer facilities are pretty much foolproof and are the future. Government just need to start funding more plant shut downs and more safer pop ups instead of pouring money into oil hungry solar panels.
That's right, only reason why solar is pushed for so much is because it uses lots of oil to make, it's a good sell for oil company's believe it or not. Nuclear on the other hand...
But, I do agree with how dangerous some of the existing ones are, can't deny that. But don't bash the future of energy, because it should begin with nuclear and solar, wind etc should be slowly brought in to lessen the load for rural towns, houses, apartments buildings etc.



posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 03:21 PM
link   
a reply to: AlienView

Important topic! Thanks for discussing - I too think we have plenty of other technologies that would suffice. There is even tech. for producing power from Kinetic Wave Energy, just saw this yesterday!



posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 03:24 PM
link   
a reply to: AlienView

I think the numbers of those who have died from coal mining is far greater.

Both due to pit cave in's and coal dust related lung diseases.



posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 03:26 PM
link   
Probably more people killed mining coal than died because of either in the same timeframe. Close to 8,000 a year in China alone. So whats safer??



posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 03:32 PM
link   
List of nuclear and radiation accidents by death toll




Chernobyl disaster[edit] 4,000 fatalities[1][2] – Chernobyl disaster, Ukraine, April 26, 1986. 56 direct deaths (47 accident workers and nine children with thyroid cancer) and it is estimated that there were 4,000 extra cancer deaths among the approximately 600,000 most highly exposed people.[3] Estimates of the total number of deaths potentially resulting from the Chernobyl disaster vary enormously: Thirty one deaths are directly attributed to the accident, all among the reactor staff and emergency workers.[4] A UNSCEAR report places the total confirmed deaths from radiation at 64 as of 2008. The World Health Organization (WHO) suggests it could reach 4,000 civilian deaths, a figure which does not include military clean-up worker casualties.[5] A 2006 report predicted 30,000 to 60,000 cancer deaths as a result of Chernobyl fallout.[6] A Greenpeace report puts this figure at 200,000 or more.[7] A disputed Russian publication, Chernobyl, concludes that 985,000 premature cancer deaths occurred worldwide between 1986 and 2004 as a result of radioactive contamination from Chernobyl.[8]

en.wikipedia.org...

To repeat:

"The World Health Organization (WHO) suggests it could reach 4,000 civilian deaths, a figure which does not include military clean-up worker casualties.[5] A 2006 report predicted 30,000 to 60,000 cancer deaths as a result of Chernobyl fallout.[6] A Greenpeace report puts this figure at 200,000 or more.[7] A disputed Russian publication, Chernobyl, concludes that 985,000 premature cancer deaths occurred worldwide between 1986 and 2004 as a result of radioactive contamination from Chernobyl"



posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 03:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: AlienView
T
There is no such thing as a 'safe' nuclear power plant -



WRONG!

thorium is a safe option.

Its cant melt down nor can it be used to make bombs.



posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 03:38 PM
link   
a reply to: AlienView
I would watch this as it may very well help you understand the usage of the term "New Dawn". Be vigilant

youtu.be...



posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 03:40 PM
link   
a reply to: mikell

What's the half-life of coal?

Exactly.



posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 03:41 PM
link   
When the sun decides to send another Carrington Event sized coronal mass ejection our way, or we're hit with a large scale EMP my ATS username becomes reality. It's only a matter of time with this many toxic time bombs scattered across the globe.
Without a doubt, nuclear technology is the single most idiotic idea humanity ever created.
edit on 26-4-2016 by Nucleardoom because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 03:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: EternalShadow
What's the half-life of coal?

Exactly.

Black lung doesn't care.

Coal mining is perceived as 'safer' because the deaths don't occur in a fixed location. It also helps that the majority of the deaths occur in developing countries.



posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 03:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Nucleardoom

Yes another big CME and we are finished as a society. Nuclear meltdown, food supplies would perish, survivors would have no communication no infrastructure.

Why all the focus on solar and wind power. Hydroelectric is the way to go yet it's not being effectively used on a large scale.



posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 03:51 PM
link   
I cant believe it has been 30 years
It was one of those moments that I remember right where I was when I heard the news.

I have been following the new safe containment structure that will be slid over the crumbling remains of the existing sarcophagus.
Here is the latest drone footage I could find.


While researching the event I came across this youtube account, bionerd23, several years ago.

She has a lot of on the ground video of the area. I think this chick is awesome!!
This video bionerd23 basically is talking about the new containment structure.


I find this next video a little crazy, but absolutely fascinating at the same time.
Bionerd23 finds a piece of the fuel from the reactor.

And finally this video.

chernobyl 2013: the hospital basement with highly contaminated clothes



Thanks for the thread AlienView
.



posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 03:52 PM
link   
a reply to: AlienView

Nuclear power far outdoes fossil fuels in environmental problems. That said, there are still uses for nuclear reactors, probably just not as large power plants.

Everyone is so freaking out about climate change (still a debated topic), clamoring to enact carbon taxes globally (does nothing to reign in carbon production, but does set up the income source for global government). But, there is a nuclear reactor that continues to melt down and destroy the pacific ocean. Not a peep. That's how you know it's all bs (not that there isn't any impact at all from fossil fuels).



posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 03:52 PM
link   
the 'pros' of nuclear power are, for me, outweighed by the 'cons'. i believe there is a (quite literally) infinitely better alternative to nuclear power and fossil fuels, beyond windfarms, solar panels etc. i believe there is a safer, cleaner, more stable and most importantly, free source of energy. i believe this knowledge is kept secret from the general population by agreement between all world powers.



posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 03:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: AlienView

Maybe if we weren't so energy hungry we wouldn't need nuclear power. But guess what, the demand got so high that coal, gas, etc couldn't keep up.
You are strawmanning against old, outdated plants, sort of pop up plants to meet energy demands.


Energy demands could have been met easily just like transportation demands, everyone that has a car could have had a self-maintained solar panels and wind turbines for all their electrical needs.

It's because big government wants us to rely on their services so they could extort money out of us like eggs in chicken farms, is why humans have built nuclear ticking bombs all over the world.

We shouldn't be thankful for it, we should gradually and safely shut them all down and replace them with clean energies.



posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 03:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Shuye

I've often wondered why all cars couldn't have a wind turbine placed directly inside the front with a funnel to help it love at the highest speeds possible.



posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 04:03 PM
link   
a reply to: alldaylong

"I am awaiting the first solar or wind powered submarine"

If we had gone with small, modular reactors, perhaps of the same designs as the Military use, then there likely would have been no major nuclear 'accidents'. The "bigger is better" models, each individually designed and built may be good for all the big engineering and construction corporations, but not for the consumer. Having smaller, modular reactors spread around the country , and staffed by military trained operators in necessary, would be the best way to go.
This video shows a nuclear reactor being installed in the Arctic, jump to about 20:00 for the reactor description. Built in a locomotive foundry, pretty basic, but it did the job.
www.youtube.com...



edit on 26-4-2016 by GaryN because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2016 @ 04:27 PM
link   
And here is the one they keep missing - A 'wasted' resource:

What waste: human excrement can fuel developing world


Gas produced by decaying human waste is a potentially major source of energy, providing electricity for millions of homes while improving sanitary conditions in developing countries, says a UN report. Biogas—about 60 percent methane—can be produced by having bacteria break down human feces. And it would be worth the equivalent of $9.5 billion in non-renewable natural gas, the UN Institute for Water, Environment and Health said on Tuesday. Residues from treated waste could yield two million tons a year of "solid" fuel worldwide that could reduce charcoal use and the number of trees being felled, which would help in global warming reduction efforts, the report added........

See whole aritcle here:
phys.org...


Obesity and overeating is a major problem of modern civilization - And probably leads to an excess of BS - If the sewer
pipes were directed to power conversion plants all the BS could be put to an economical use for power.

Who will be the first entrepreneur who is willng to 'get his hands dirty' so to speak and make it happen ?

You can call your new company 'BS Industries, Inc.' - the Bull stops here !



new topics




 
16
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join