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.

 

Breaking News.. Brownsville Levee Near Cooper Nuclear Plant in Nebraska Just Broke! Here We Go !!!!

page: 24
152
<< 21  22  23    25 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 01:11 PM
link   
.A top regulator said on Sunday that a nuclear power plant threatened by flooding from the swollen Missouri River was operating safely and according to standards.

Obviously lies because there's no mention of millions dead, the end of the world or Nibiru

edit on 27-6-2011 by Essan because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 03:20 PM
link   



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by SarK0Y
 


NRC busy morning: www.nrc.gov...

List of plant write ups no idea what the deal is with NRC saying there will be direct oversight:
www.nrc.gov...






l
edit on 27-6-2011 by donlashway because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by donlashway because: write up link added



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 09:54 PM
link   



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 10:55 AM
link   
WOW...Arizona nuclear facilty in danger of wild fire.Nebraska nuclear plant is in danger of flooding over.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jobeycool
WOW...Arizona nuclear facilty in danger of wild fire.Nebraska nuclear plant is in danger of flooding over.


Don't forget to add in NJ going into "hot shutdown".
This stuff must happening all the time and the MSM doesn't report on it.
But now they are very focused on it because the Japan crisis.
Seems like all these reactors are aging poorly.

NJ Reactor in Hot Shutdown



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Absum!
 

Actually, they ain't Just physically being wearied out, but it has hopelessly bad design. now, we got too hard climate to allow so dangerous facilities to be operated. i even don't speak of furioso droughts, which are more hazardous for plants than flooding.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 10:49 PM
link   
Can someone tell me why they don't just blow up a levee or two on the opposite side to reduce the water level and divert some of the water away from the plants. I mean they have time to evacuate the area first and it beats a nuclear disaster. I am sure there would be allot of displaced persons and property damage but it beats the alternative.Can someone explain to me why this isn't an option anyone has mentioned. I am not familiar with the area but it seems to me that that would be the logical thing to do.



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 07:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Ladysophiaofsandoz
 


you could just build those levees a little lower and they automaticly devert the river at the shut down level, check river gauges it's going around cooper
edit on 29-6-2011 by donlashway because: can't spell



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 08:39 AM
link   
So why aren't they doing it? Can anyone tell me.



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 08:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Ladysophiaofsandoz
 


Because of this:



And this:



The plant is located approximately here:



Looking at the areas that are indicated to have flooded, you will see a that there is a large volume of water downstream from the plant while there is an even larger volume of water upstream, with even more on the way.

The water down stream has to be evacuated before any more water from upstream arrives at the plant's location. Water won't flow upstream unless it's pumped.


The Fort Calhoun Nuclear Generating Station is a nuclear power plant located on 660 acres (270 ha) between Fort Calhoun, and Blair, Nebraska adjacent to the Missouri River. The utility has an easement for another 580 acres (230 ha) which is maintained in a natural state. The power plant is owned and operated by the Omaha Public Power District of Omaha, Nebraska.
emphasis mine
source

The river has created a valley, shallow though it may be, which means that the point where the plant is located is among the lowest elevation in it's region and with how widespread the flooding is the water just has no where to go.



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 09:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Observer99

Originally posted by Nosred
Like I've said countless times, neither Chernobyl nor Fukushima were modern nuclear reactors and neither were up to safety standards. Both disasters could have been averted if proper safety measures had been taken.


How comforting. Especially to the families of all the children that died at Chernobyl from being out in the black rains, all the families of the people who die to leukemia and bone cancers and other cancers because of the "unfortunate mistakes" of this noble industry. Tell me, friend, when I breathe in my particle of plutonium from Fukushima, and get lung cancer in 2022, where is my legal recourse or recompense? How can I even prove what killed me let alone punish anyone for it?

Nuclear contamination -- the perfect murder.

Estimates are that up to 100,000 or more people died as a result of Chernobyl up till now. But between 1995 and 2005 in the US alone over 200,000 died from coal power plant emissions. New safety measures that were implemented after 2001 have reduced the losses by almost half, but it doesn't erase the stark numbers of people who have died over the past several decades. And god knows how many have died in China or elsewhere across the world!

You can't have your cake and eat it too without consequences. Nuclear power can be dangerous, it has outrageously expensive insurance costs (requires government intervetion to get companies to do it), and we're not altogether sure what to do with the waste. All true, and more. But don't ignore what's happening elsewhere! If you choose to ignore, there're consequences.

The same thing happens in politics. One side ignores the other. Consequences!

That's why politicians in cartoons are well fed. They have their cake and eat it too.
edit on 29-6-2011 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Ladysophiaofsandoz
 




Can someone tell me why they don't just blow up a levee

they've done it, but those actions are non-official because there ain't laid purposes to be cruelly sued for damages of the private areas

edit on 29-6-2011 by SarK0Y because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 07:48 PM
link   
Sounds feasible they are still catching hell over what they did last year during the flood.

www.nytimes.com...



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 05:27 PM
link   
Has anyone heard anything new about this situation or the Los Alamos fire? I haven't been able to find any new information. How is it that these two game changing events are happening and it doesn't even get mentioned but I have three news outlet running Casey Anthony trial all day?



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 08:51 PM
link   
I just found this posted 7/1/2011 @ 4:24

www.kptm.com...

www.ketv.com...

theintelhub.com...

Emergency Management Coordinator Jeff Theulen said he was alerted Friday morning that the levee may have been in the process of being intentionally breached. About 20 minutes later, officials said they received calls from people wanting to know why levees were being blown up. One caller claimed to have witnessed the explosion.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 09:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Ladysophiaofsandoz
 




At this time it doesn't appear that the Army Corps of Engineers or any other governmental entity was involved.
-----------
www.kptm.com...



Da God has witnessed i like these guys
Smells al-queda & Spirit of pure Evil (bin laden)

edit on 1-7-2011 by SarK0Y because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 11:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by jadedANDcynical
reply to post by Ladysophiaofsandoz
 






wow, looking at those maps that's just insane.
I hope it's not as bad as it looks.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 11:38 PM
link   
reply to post by jonnywhite
 


"Estimates are that up to 100,000 or more people died as a result of Chernobyl up till now. But between 1995 and 2005 in the US alone over 200,000 died from coal power plant emissions. New safety measures that were implemented after 2001 have reduced the losses by almost half, but it doesn't erase the stark numbers of people who have died over the past several decades. And god knows how many have died in China or elsewhere across the world!"

Source for the deaths from coal power plant emissions between 1995 and 2005 please.
Otherwise I call B.S.!

I work in a coal power plant and have for the last 10 years. If your bs made up statistics were true I and all my coworkers would be dead!

I will not argue that coal plants are good for the environment but they are not even remotely as bad as they are made out to be: and until we change our grid and move away from a load based electrical system we are stuck with coal. The sun doesn't shine all the time and the wind doesn't blow all the time.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 11:40 PM
link   
It appears to be to the south east of Fort Calhoun so I would think that it would affect the plant but it's not something someone should do without consulting someone.




top topics



 
152
<< 21  22  23    25 >>

log in

join