The Earth is on Life Support

reply to post by Unity_99

but the majority of Canadian citizens get things and are horrified by US policies, consider living next to them akin to living next to Nazi Germany and are never ever going to be "one" with the US.

This is your odd idea. The majority of Canadians do not think in this wacko manner.

I'll bet I've seen more of Canada than you have. I know I've seen more. I've hung out with Canadians from Labrador to Quebec to Ontario to BC to the Yukon.

Your story is not believable.

Two nukes just got hit by earthquakes and the plants responded as they should have.

news.yahoo.com...

Two nuclear reactors at the North Anna Power Station in the same county as the epicenter were automatically taken off line by safety systems around the time of the earthquake, said Roger Hannah, a spokesman for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

The Dominion-operated power plant is being run off of four emergency diesel generators, which are supplying power for critical safety equipment. Hannah said the agency was not immediately aware of any damage at nuclear power plants in the Southeast.

Originally posted by OneEleven
reply to post by kro32

 

Originally posted by kro32
If humans lived by being afraid of "what if's" we would never have left the cave.

I notice you offer no solutions so what do you suggest to replace them?

You don't replace them.....You take them down and crush them....

You change the way you live.....You change your habits, eliminating the things you think you need.....You no longer need the high paying job....You plant a garden....You ride a bike....You stop watching TV....You leave the internet and never return.....

You eliminate the need....

What a fantastic answer... It amazes how many people just do not look, at what you propose, as a solution. I've been saying it for years. We are like spoiled children clinging on to out toys and stamping our feet at the thought of losing them.

If I could give you a thousand stars for that I would.

To the OP... Great thread

This is all part of Destiny's Touch... she placed her hand on the minds and hearts of those in power in order to arrange this exact pattern to allow The Final Coming. It is all part of the plan to try and save humanity from the pain of the Closed Third Eye, we suffer from within and our soul dies. Only the sacred alien blood keeps us living.

Cheers,
Destiny Fulfilled.

What does any of this have to do with 2012?

So far nothing at all.

Originally posted by stereologist
Two nukes just got hit by earthquakes and the plants responded as they should have.

news.yahoo.com...

Two nuclear reactors at the North Anna Power Station in the same county as the epicenter were automatically taken off line by safety systems around the time of the earthquake, said Roger Hannah, a spokesman for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

The Dominion-operated power plant is being run off of four emergency diesel generators, which are supplying power for critical safety equipment. Hannah said the agency was not immediately aware of any damage at nuclear power plants in the Southeast.

That's great and all but the problem with nuclear power; is that even very rare problems are very serious problems.

The damage to the world can not be fixed by insurance or any amount of money.

It forever changes life on this planet.

It long term damage is not worth the short term benefit.

reply to post by Jezus


Goodness sakes. That seems like a near quote of another post.

When a hydrodam fails as it has in the past, the devastation was immense with hundreds outright killed.

Ever worked in a plant making photoelectric cells? Ever look at the incredibly dangerous materials used in the manufacture of those materials? I really doubt you have.

reply to post by stereologist


All things have risks.

But in the case of nuclear power it doesn't seem possible to justify long term irreversible damage to the planet as a whole for the short term benefits of power.

reply to post by Jezus


The same can be said of the carcinogenic materials used in photovoltaic cells and released from coal sludge. The destruction of bat and bird populations by wind turbines has been gruesome in many places. Fish populations have been destroyed by hydro projects.

Nukes have their pluses. No greenhouse gas emissions. Smaller footprint.

The downside is not necessarily the plant. All of the radioactive releases from all power plants in the world in a year do not add up to the releases from a uranium mine in a day. You're looking in the wrong direction for radioactive problems.

This thread still has nothing to do with 2012. Nothing at all. Why is this thread here?

Maybe the planet earth would form a belt like seen on Jupiter... it would be highly radioactive and lethal, seperating the northern hemisphere from the south... sounds like a good novel, lol.

If it were up to me, we'd all be living by candle light and tending to the gardens of the planet... But here we are, so I will go with herd until the rest start jumping off cliffs. I'll just wander astray in to a forest then...take my chances with the invisible stuff....IF it were to occur.

Originally posted by stereologist
The same can be said of the carcinogenic materials used in photovoltaic cells and released from coal sludge. The destruction of bat and bird populations by wind turbines has been gruesome in many places. Fish populations have been destroyed by hydro projects.

None of that is comparable to a nuclear meltdown...

Originally posted by stereologist
You're looking in the wrong direction for radioactive problems.

Your talking about a nuclear power plant functioning properly...



The thread is about the inevitable catastrophes that cause irreparable damage to the planet and irreversibly changes to human life and the global ecosystem...

reply to post by Jezus

None of that is comparable to a nuclear meltdown...

Maybe in your limited understanding of the issues at hand.

Your talking about a nuclear power plant functioning properly...

I already spelled it out for you - the issue is the mining, not the reactor.

The thread is about the inevitable catastrophes that cause irreparable damage to the planet and irreversibly changes to human life and the global ecosystem...

And what does that have to do with 2012?

Originally posted by stereologist

None of that is comparable to a nuclear meltdown...

Maybe in your limited understanding of the issues at hand.

It is not even remotely comparable in any way, shape, or form.

Inevitable catastrophes that cause irreparable damage to the planet and irreversibly changes to human life and the global ecosystem...

VS

Originally posted by stereologist
The destruction of bat and bird populations by wind turbines

reply to post by Jezus

It is not even remotely comparable in any way, shape, or form.

Inevitable catastrophes that cause irreparable damage to the planet and irreversibly changes to human life and the global ecosystem...

Yes, we've heard this boring rhetoric several times now. You simply have no idea what you are talking about and continue to issue this refrain. I get it - you're just uninformed. Thanks. We knew that.

The issue here is what this thread has to do with 2012. No one has linked this thread to 2012.

According to the Nuclear Energy Institute as of 2010:

19.6% of the electricity in the U.S. is supplied by nuclear energy with Vermont at 73.3% and Connecticut, New Jersey, South Carolina, New Hampshire and Ilinois at around 50%

14% of the electricity worldwide is supplied by nuclear energy with France at 74.1% and Slovakia, Belgium, Ukraine and Hungary at around 50%

"As of August 2011, 29 countries worldwide are operating 440 nuclear reactors for electricity generation and 66 new nuclear plants are under construction in 15 countries."

According to the World Nuclear Organization as of February 2011 in addition to the 440 commercial reactors, there are 56 countries with a further 250 reactors for research and another 189 reactors that power ships and submarines.

According to an article from frontier group.org titled 'How Many U.S. Nuclear Plants are Located Near Earthquake Faults?' from March 16, 2011

"The World Nuclear Association estimates that 20% of nuclear reactors worldwide operate in areas vulnerable to earthquakes."

"In the United States, several nuclear reactors in California and New York are located on or near known faults."

One of the faults near to Diablo Canyon in CA wasn't discovered until 2008. Two active faults were only recently discovered within 1 mile of Indian Point in NY with 10 million people living within 25 miles of that reactor.


Building a nuclear reactor to withstand a certain magnitude of earthquake is shown to be idiotic in these times when earthquakes and tsunamis are exceeding the wildest expectations. Oh and I forgot to mention that there are 23 plants currently using the Mark 1 like in Fukushima all in the eastern half of the U.S.

Originally posted by luxordelphi
Building a nuclear reactor to withstand a certain magnitude of earthquake is shown to be idiotic in these times when earthquakes and tsunamis are exceeding the wildest expectations. Oh and I forgot to mention that there are 23 plants currently using the Mark 1 like in Fukushima all in the eastern half of the U.S.

I'm sure if we spent enough money we could make nuclear reactors almost impenetrable to earth quakes and other issues.

The problem is almost is not good enough.

No matter what we do, there will be rare incidents.

These rare incidents change human DNA and the Earth as a whole.

No amount of money or insurance can reverse the effects.

reply to post by RenegadeScholar


I as glad to find this thread as I was just thinking the same thing, what would happen to nuclear power plants if there was a major power outage or a bad solar storm. And I do not consider myself a gloom and doom kind of person, but I find this situation very disturbing. These plants need constant power and many people do not really understand that you do not just turn them off.

I understand why some here are worried about the cost to the economy, but if there were several meltdowns, the effect on the economy would be devastating, just look at Japan. I wonder what people in that area would say if we asked them now "Do you wish we had never built nuclear power plants?"

However, my main concern is the long term health effects that will happen. What will happen to the people, and what about fishing? Many cultures depend on fish to survive, so what would happen if that food source was no longer available, due to radiation.

I have been mentioning this to non-conspiracy minded friends, and even they think that this is a really bad plan, which surprised me as usually they just dismiss everything. Hopefully, what just happened in Japan will make people think, we can always hope things can be changed for the better.

There are plans to build many more reactors in the US. Europe did not stop building nuclear plants as did the US.

Originally posted by PacificBlue
However, my main concern is the long term health effects that will happen. What will happen to the people, and what about fishing? Many cultures depend on fish to survive, so what would happen if that food source was no longer available, due to radiation.

The real issue is the permanent changes to both human and animal DNA and the global ecosystem.

The domino effect of such changes are truly disturbing.