Nebraska nuclear power plant at Emergency Level 4 and could become another Fukushima

page: 5
65
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by wasco2
reply to post by RoyalBlue
 


Not a nuclear industry shill. Not a mindless tree hugger either. Bottom line is we NEED nuclear power. But beyond that nuclear power is the cleanest, safest, and potentially cheapest way we have to generate electricity. And in case you haven't noticed, our civilization would grind to a halt without cheap, reliable, and plentiful electricity. Don't blather to me about solar and wind energy either. They don't work well enough, and will NEVER work well enough, to ever provide any significant amount of our energy needs. Right now, in the US, most of our electricity comes from coal fired generating plants. A coal plant is orders of magnitude dirtier and more dangerous than modern nuke plants. What we need to be doing is building breeder reactors like there's no tomorrow because without them there may not be a tomorrow. A breeder reactor consumes it's own fuel leaving only a very small amount of admittedly very toxic waste. For the waste that's left the fed.gov needs to reopen and finish Yucca Mnt. and tell you, and all other tree huggers, to take a flying leap.

I doubt we'll do it yet. When a large enough percentage of the population is subjected to rolling blackouts and forced to choose between buying food or enough exorbitantly expensive energy to keep the lights on we might consider it. I just hope by then it's not too late.


No wasco, with your plan there WILL BE NO tomorrow. You need to re-educate yourself on the empty lies that nuclear power is the cheapest, cleanest, safest energy source out there. I'll tell you what, I'll even buy you a nice place to live inside an available reactor, your whole family too. There you can live your blissfully ignorant way of life, grow a garden, whatever your heart desires, until it all goes BOOM..............




posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 10:44 PM
link   
reply to post by RoyalBlue
 


My granny always said, "Never argue with an idiot, he'll drag you down to his level and beat you with experience". She was a lot of things but stupid wasn't one of them so I'm done with you.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 10:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by RoyalBlue
No wasco, with your plan there WILL BE NO tomorrow. You need to re-educate yourself on the empty lies that nuclear power is the cheapest, cleanest, safest energy source out there. I'll tell you what, I'll even buy you a nice place to live inside an available reactor, your whole family too. There you can live your blissfully ignorant way of life, grow a garden, whatever your heart desires, until it all goes BOOM..............


Can you provide a source for this? Studies have shown that working at a nuclear power plant is safer than working at an office.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 10:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by SarK0Y
yeah, you're helliciously right. plants were developed & operated in manner of delayed bombs: plants cannot be shut down by passive schemes (without electricity), they need long period to cool reactors... Ohhh, what i've been talking about??!!! Actually, these f*cking things cannot be stopped at all due to pools of spent rods. Just for fasty buckies, purely-suicidal projects have been realized!


With the current gen of nuclear reactors it's actually incredibly hard to cause a meltdown, and they're already moving on to the next gen.

Edit: Current gen,
en.wikipedia.org...

Gen that will be appearing in the next twenty years,
en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 23-6-2011 by Nosred because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 11:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Nosred
 





With the current gen of nuclear reactors it's actually incredibly hard to cause a meltdown, and they're already moving on to the next gen.

perhaps, you have to learn RTFM before to say something
spent rods need non-stop cooling, shut-down reactors need to've continuous cooling because of decay heat too. really effective way to diminish time to cool is to poison nuclear reaction. but it makes restart of plant more expensive.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 11:43 PM
link   
reply to post by SarK0Y
 


The generation III nuclear reactors have improved thermal efficiency over the generation II, and the core damage frequencies for generation III reactors is significantly lower than generation II -- with 3 core damage events per 1000 million reactor-year for the ESBWR compared to 10,000 core damage events per 1000 million reactor- year for generation II reactors.

In layman's terms that means the odds of a reactor meltdown are lower than the odds of getting struck by lightning, and the generation IV reactors that will be coming in the next twenty years are even safer.
edit on 23-6-2011 by Nosred because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 11:48 PM
link   
I think it is time we heed the suggestion from the feds to go ahead and approve a public waste state.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 11:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheBrontide
I think it is time we heed the suggestion from the feds to go ahead and approve a public waste state.





we did... it is called the united state



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 11:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkipperJohn

Originally posted by TheBrontide
I think it is time we heed the suggestion from the feds to go ahead and approve a public waste state.





we did... it is called the united state


Or more specifically,... each individual reactor site.

Betcha didnt know that reactor sites are required to hold their waste product and dispense in a set time frame their waste.

Otherwise a fine imposed daily.



But guess what, there is no place to dump their trash, so the fine continues until somewhere and someplace is found.

Only one way out now that the dump is closed for business.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 12:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Nosred
 


i did say of old design, but new ones have to show itself in practice. when Titanic got first breathe, only lazy bugger was not saying how this ship incredibly powerful, superior, safe & bla-bla-bla like that



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 12:13 AM
link   
reply to post by SarK0Y
 


Generation III reactors have shown themselves in practice, judging by the fact that there haven't been any accidents with them in the past twenty years of their operation. Of course, anti-nuclear activists in America have made it next to impossible to construct new nuclear power plants so America has no generation III reactors to my knowledge. We have to rely on the less safe and obsolete type II reactors that you get all the problems with, like the ones in Fukushima and Chernobyl.

The first generation IV reactor won't be completed until 2021 so we'll see then how that fares, until then then generation III reactors have proven to be safer than any other viable energy source on the market.

Edit: And actually the Titanic could have been saved if the captain and crew weren't idiots, but I don't really want to get into that right now.
edit on 24-6-2011 by Nosred because: (no reason given)


Edit: I might be wrong here but to my knowledge there has never been an accident with generation III reactors, which would make them safer than every energy source except solar power.
edit on 24-6-2011 by Nosred because: (no reason given)
edit on 24-6-2011 by Nosred because: (no reason given)
edit on 24-6-2011 by Nosred because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 12:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Nosred
 




Generation III reactors have shown themselves in practice

they have been too short on "orbit" to make decision of their real safety. but i don't argue w\o new techs, in particular nuclear industry, we have no normal future.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 12:31 AM
link   
reply to post by SarK0Y
 


Too short on "orbit"? They've been active longer than wind turbines and have killed fewer people while both are fairly uncommon. I think that's a testament to their safety.

Actually 'fewer' is an understatement. Generation III reactors have killed zero people while wind turbines have killed somewhere in the low hundreds, and have injured many more, all while producing a fraction of the energy that the reactors have produced and at a much higher cost.
edit on 24-6-2011 by Nosred because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Nosred
 




wind turbines and have killed fewer people while both are fairly uncommon.

hmmmmm.... kind of too strange info: wind turbines cannot pose so potentially-huge threat to Environment like nuclear industry does & did. but(!!!) wind power is perfectly useless of their efficiency & capacity factors... In short phrases, we have no rights to downgrade factual & possible threats of nuclear power. however, that industry has been one of Crucial Keys of Scientific Progress



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 04:15 PM
link   
reply to post by SarK0Y
 


Yep, nuclear power kills fewer people per terawatt hour than any other energy source, even wind power and solar power. Don't take my word for it though, check this out.

nextbigfuture.com...
edit on 24-6-2011 by Nosred because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 02:44 PM
link   
Flood berm collapses at Nebraska nuclear plant

The berm's collapse didn't affect the reactor shutdown cooling or the spent fuel pool cooling, but the power supply was cut after water surrounded the main electrical transformers, the NRC said. Emergency generators powered the plant Sunday while workers tried to restore power.

One step away from Fukushima 2.



posted on Jul, 4 2011 @ 06:50 PM
link   


Many nuclear power plants have underground piping, which is rarely inspected properly. Much of this is corroding, causing radioactive leaks and spills of tritium and other radionuclides at several sites. But when certain parts or systems of American nuclear plants come close to violating standards, either the Government or the industry undertakes ‘research’ and both conclude that standards can be lowered! The excuse is, “the standards were overly conservative”. Thus, failing parts and systems are allowed to conform to diluted standards. And when the systems and parts still do not conform, the regulators issue waivers or amendments or special exceptions and let the nuclear plants keep operating.
----------------------------------
www.dailypioneer.com...


Actually, those plants cannot be inspected & treated properly because cooling system has to be online w\o pauses.



posted on Jul, 26 2011 @ 10:58 AM
link   
Anyone know if the water has receded from the point shown on the video?

edit on 26-7-2011 by Kreeger because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
65
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join