Underwater Nuclear Reactors.

So many tragedies,so many dead in underwater accidents,or no accidents,
We cannot prevent tragedies,but in the same time, we do nothing to prevent them.
We live in a relative comfort,but we don't know the dangers that surround us.
How many of us know, that we poison the oceans with radioactive material, for many decades now.Poison in the air poison, in the sea.

source(www.nationalgeographic.com...

TextRadioactive nuclear reactors are resting around the globe on the seafloor in derelict subs—some the results of accidents, some intentionally dumped. Whether they pose a threat to marine and human life now, or if they ever will, remains an open question—and one that may not be answered for another thousand years. The remains of two U.S. and three Soviet nuclear subs, including reactors and in some cases nuclear-tipped torpedoes, all rest in deep water on the bottom of the Atlantic; any removal efforts would be extremely difficult and costly. The Russians also dumped a number of old submarine reactors in the Arctic Ocean from about 1960 to 1990. They lie at depths from about 40 feet (12 meters) to 985 feet (300 meters).

source(www.nationalgeographic.com...

The nuclear reactors from subs .A bomb with clock.
Who is to blame!Who is to hold accountable!

Hmm... I'm not sure that is the real issue with ocean pollution.. A sunken sub isn't a good thing,but I think the main problem is dumping trash on beaches, chemicals from factories, oil from leaks and stuff like that.

Originally posted by truthinfact
Hmm... I'm not sure that is the real issue with ocean pollution.. A sunken sub isn't a good thing,but I think the main problem is dumping trash on beaches, chemicals from factories, oil from leaks and stuff like that.

They are a real danger,but people don't know the reality,who know what processes of corrosion take place there.

Is it just me, or does putting nuclear material in International waters seem like a really dumb idea?

America putting the reactors in the Gulf Stream is like a little radioactive present for Great Britian to deal with if it goes wrong. How thoughtful!

Originally posted by MahmoudAhmadinejad
Is it just me, or does putting nuclear material in International waters seem like a really dumb idea?

America putting the reactors in the Gulf Stream is like a little radioactive present for Great Britian to deal with if it goes wrong. How thoughtful!

It's that you Mahmoud?Well,the real problem is that all this radioactive material could,affect bio marine life in the future,especially as time goes by.

Originally posted by MahmoudAhmadinejad
Is it just me, or does putting nuclear material in International waters seem like a really dumb idea?

America putting the reactors in the Gulf Stream is like a little radioactive present for Great Britian to deal with if it goes wrong. How thoughtful!

And as they say - It's the thought that counts !!

Originally posted by KAIARAHI

Originally posted by MahmoudAhmadinejad
Is it just me, or does putting nuclear material in International waters seem like a really dumb idea?

America putting the reactors in the Gulf Stream is like a little radioactive present for Great Britian to deal with if it goes wrong. How thoughtful!

And as they say - It's the thought that counts !!

edit on 11-12-2011 by KAIARAHI because: posting mistake.

Mods I am surrounded!!

The submarines were all accidents.

The "ocean" is a big place...its a perfect place to (even) build reactors; Never a cooling pump problem... water (shields) absorbs radiation better than most dry land materials. That's why reactors tend to be constructed with deep pools of water over them.
www.sciencephoto.com...

Originally posted by 46ACE
The submarines were all accidents.

The "ocean" is a big place...its a perfect place to (even) build reactors; Never a cooling pump problem... water (shields) absorbs radiation better than most dry land materials. That's why reactors tend to be constructed with deep pools of water over them.
www.sciencephoto.com...

Big place,but very inhabited,who are we to invade their world with nuclear reactors?

reply to post by diamondsmith


You want a disaster, research where coastal cities, like NY, dump their garbage. Research the international laws on "dumping garbage at sea". It makes those reactors look like natural uranium sources.

Just for the hell of it, here is a head start on that research

Marine debris, also known as marine litter, is human created waste that has deliberately or accidentally become afloat in a lake, sea, ocean or waterway. Oceanic debris tends to accumulate at the centre of gyres and on coastlines,[1] frequently washing aground, when it is known as beach litter or tidewrack. Deliberate disposal of wastes at sea is called ocean dumping.

or a few images from google
Google images of garbage at sea
Or military dumping grounds

WE ARE LETTING GREEDY CO#$!*#%@RS KILL OUR PLANET!!!

Q: Why do we buy things just to throw them out?
A: BECAUSE THAT'S ALL THEY ARE SELLING US

reply to post by Glargod
Not natural uranium,but a ticking bomb,you don't know the effects on long term!

Originally posted by diamondsmith
reply to post by Glargod

 

Not natural uranium,but a ticking bomb,you don't the effects on long term!

Are you insinuating that they would "blow up" ?

The worse that will happen is that the area will become radioactively contaminated and some sea life will die. the dangers and hazards are probably 1,000,000 to 1 less than a land based nuclear facility or a atomic bomb sheltered in a silo.

Originally posted by Glargod

Originally posted by diamondsmith
reply to post by Glargod

 

Not natural uranium,but a ticking bomb,you don't the effects on long term!

Are you insinuating that they would "blow up" ?

The worse that will happen is that the area will become radioactively contaminated and some sea life will die. the dangers and hazards are probably 1,000,000 to 1 less than a land based nuclear facility or a atomic bomb sheltered in a silo.

"The disaster the we don't have yet are the disaster's of the future"

diamondsmith

"The danger that we don't see,is the last thing that we may see"

diamonsmith

"The danger that we don't see,is the last thing that we may see" diamonsmith

reply to post by diamondsmith


I like that

We will always find the thing we are looking for in the last place searched
-Unknown

We do not know, what we do not know
-Unknown

Actually us as a whole nation should be held responsible pollution in air trash on the beach the oil spill we won't care until its too late

Decline of US nuclear energy. Recently I was inspecting some of US nuclear power plants and honestly that gave me creeps. Let me be more particular, US nuclear power plants, the most of them, were constructed with many slips and that's why they are short-lived in comparison with analogs in other countries. I visited nuclear power plants in Europe and I have to say they are much safer and more effective. All that mess with our nuclear energy bear menace like reactor emergency outage, leakage and outbreak of radioactive materials. It was reported many times that since 2002 there were many emergency situations on 48 of 65 US nuclear power plants. Maybe the most notorious case is leakage in cooling system of SONGS in California on 31 of January 2012. In practice US nuclear energy suffers a setback because of lack of investment, reconstruction and potential dangers it bears, especially now when weather conditions are bad and Isaac is coming... The situation becomes more ugly with every hour and may lead to disaster accidents where nuclear power plants will be involved...

USA promotes nuclear energy. There is no big secret that today people around the world want to have a nuclear free place to live in, especially after the tragic event in Japan. But in spite of it, US government is not going to stop the operating nuclear power plants, but even wants to upgrade them. I visited with inspection Virgil C. Summer nuclear generating station where government plans to build two more additional units and I have to say it is very risky plan because the plant is located in seismic active zone where earthquake intense is high enough to cause core damage... In addition, the government laid out a huge sum for the project that not only dangerous, but also falls short of expectations. As far as I know something similar happens at Vogtle in Georgia... In spite of protests the authorities are going to finish the projects, waste money of taxpayers and finally endanger them and all because to keep visibility that US is world's leader in atomic power engineering... Japan's example showed us it isn't worth while... Previously I was a big adherent of nuclear energy, but now I see that it is time to stop...

As for the floating islands of trash in the ocean; those will eventually be consumed by the plastic eating bacteria that lives in the amazon. If the heart of the amazon is pierced by plastic than presumably their will be such bad pollution that the bacteria spreads like a wildfire world wide. Now as for those reactors; I think the moon would be a better location than the sea because nothing lives up there and it's already radiioactive from cosmic rays and an atmosphere that doesn't stop asteroids and comets. When comets and asteroids strike they essentially go nuclear from the high speeds; which is why any evidence of ancient atomics can be easily explained away as an impact.

Really good info op. This makes a lot of the recent "dead fish" / other animals in China stories make sense.