I was wrong.

I have been a lifetime supporter of nuclear energy.

The fact that the Japanese, regarded as the most capable and responsible users of nuclear plants for energy generation are having problems after a massive earthquake, shows this is not the way to make electricity any longer.

I am in the no nuclear camp now.

wait for all the woo and a few other choice terms though.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Unless you're a nuke scientist and failed in your calculations or something

Most of us here can only have opinions based on the info we're able to access and understand

A reactor on the moon is a great idea! A reactor sitting on a lot of faultlines...well shit something is going to happen, there is no guessing involved. It is not a matter of how, but when imo. I'm all for nuclear power provided to us by the Sun and honestly believe that if any people on the planet can deal with this kind of incident, it is the Japanese. They built their whole culture around disaster management. They are working on ways to stop a total meltdown from happening and I believe they will succeed.

and can't be fixed seal it shut. Only solution and still not a good one. Radiation can get in the water supply. There is no safe nuke plant. Never will be unless the proverbial cold fusion is attained.

....welcome aboard, and may God help us when it happens here....

But holding out on any final judgment for now. If the alternative is wind and solar, then great. But if the alternative is coal? I just don't know...

We need to look up at satellite based solar power. Why worry about creating our own fission or even fusion (like hell) reaction, when we can just use the big ass sun we have available!

There must be some way to burn coal in a reactor under extremely high pressure, then stockpile the exhaust gases at high pressure. You would have the risk of an explosion, but it would be a lot better, because you wouldn't the same kind of radioactivity.

The air pollution from coal-fired power plants is estimated to kill about 40,000 people every year. In comparison, Chernobyl killed about 8,000 total.

The idea that coal is somehow safer than nuclear is absolute, pure, unalloyed propaganda.

What we need are ways to store the energy generated by solar, wind, and other sources. This technology is difficult but not as difficult as nuclear was to develop. It's a shame that we invested in nuclear when we could have invested in safer alternatives.

If we keep saying that we have no alternatives but nuclear or coal then all we'll ever have is....nuclear and coal. Both are unacceptably bad. Let's stop investing in them.

i don't like nuclear power but after seeing mountaintop removal mining and other horrors, i think i prefer * well-regulated * nuclear to coal power. Knowing that there is the risk of catastrophe. But I think with coal the risk becomes more of a certainty, just over a longer period of time.

And I thought France was considered the most responsible country using nuclear power. I never paid much attention or heard much about Japan as a nuke user until now.

(Disclaimer: I work for a company that includes a major business unit that profits from maintenance on all sorts of power plants, including coal and nuclear. Increased regulation and maintenance requirements would create more demand for my employer's business. We are also developing business in the alternative energy market, but not fast enough for me. No one is. )

I think that increases the danger.

I am not shilling for nuclear - I think all options are bad, we need to cut our consumption (and curtail our population growth among other things). Even alternative energy has downsides (but I believe it's probably less bad than fossil and nuke).

There's just too many people on the planet wanting too much energy. The ironic thing is that our energy choices may ultimately 'solve' that problem (although not in a way any of us would want).

n/t

That is fucking real important!

years no problems. And it's on a fault line. So where do you get the 8 yrs? Give example that is proof like chernobyl.

with radioactive pollution is through something like this! :rofl:

You know they have to stockpile that waste in big old pools of water. And that water never leaks. :eyes:

We have a long way to go with what we already use (waste).

Often when I hear about the subject, the image pops into my mind: what if every treadmill in existence were hooked up to provide energy?

(Yes, I say this in jest; still, I wonder..)

Cars are overrated.

:hi:

I know how you feel, I used to be the same way. What the heck, if someone wanted to live on an Island or along coast that is prone to catastrophic earthquakes, more power to them. If they wanted to live in a city that was built below sea level and were protected by man made sea walls, fine. Maybe they decided to live where hurricanes or tornadoes could strike at a moments notice or the rivers would regularly flood, who am I to say.

But no more dammit! Laws and regulations need to be implemented to prevent any possible danger.

It's just not worth it.

big industry prevails

Any more than one skyscraper collapsing in an unprecedentedly huge earthquake is evidence that we should never build skyscrapers. The third largest quake of all time, along with more than a hundred and thirty "smaller" shocks each registering a 5.0 on up to a 7 magnitude (7 being the level of the quake that destroyed Haiti) and the oldest two nuclear plants in the area are having problems? This is evidence that nuclear power can NEVER be used safely, anywhere, ever?

In a week's time, these things are going to have been locked down without any substantial release of radiation, and life is going to return to normal. And people will have learned the valuable lesson to replace older, unreliable plants with newer and better designed technology.

Yes.

Portion by portion, parts of our planet are now becoming unihabitable by nuclear power. The Japanese are arguably the most advanced in earthquake preparedness and nuclear power plant safey.

This tragedy has shown the price is too high, even for the most advanced, no matter what the "better" nuclear technology will be.

Skyscrapers may fall and cities collapse, but they can be rebuilt. But not toxic ones for centuries.

This isn't Chernobyl, this is a three mile island event at worst, and even that event wasn't that bad.

What isn't accepted is how much radioactivity has been released to the environment, and the status of primary containment.

It doesn't matter if the fuel cells melt, if everything melts, so long as it remains contained. In this case the pressure vessel appear intact and they had some rods burst. If they can minimize the environmental release, then this was a success.

Nobody wants to say I told you so when we have a worldwide crisis like this.

We should harness the wind and the water and the sun. We have to do something different - or we are going to destroy ourselves.

Blessings to everyone and my prayers go out to my fellow humans in Japan,
Annette

Lyric from Conspiracy Theory Rock - a Robert Smiegel TV Funhouse cartoon that only aired ONCE on SNL and is now banned and has never been shown in rerun - too much truth.

Video: http://www.break.com/usercontent/2007/12/conspiracy-Theory-Rock-416809

LYRICS:

It's a media-opoly
A media-opoly.
The whole media is controlled by a few corporations
thanks to deregulation by the FCC.

You mean Disney, Fox, WestingHouse, and good ol GE?
They own networks from CBS to CNBC.
They can use them to say whatever they please,
and put down the opinions of any one who disagrees.
Or stuff about PCB's.

What are PCB's?
They come from power plants built by WestingHouse and GE.
They can give you lots of cancer that can hurt your body,
but on network TV, you rarely hear anything bad about the nuclear industry.

Like when WestingHouse was sued for fraud?
Which time?
GE made defective bolts.
It was an unreported crime.
Or when it was boycotted for robbing nuclear bomb plants
just to sqeeze a dime.

That's a footnote by the way.
A footnote protects you from folks who doubt what you say.
Now maybe the voices in my head will go away.

But the bigshots don't care.
They're all sitting pretty.
Thanks to corporate welfare.
What's that now?

They get billions in subsidies
from the government.
It's supposed to create jobs,
but that's not how it's spent.

They use PACs and soft money
to support congressmen
who will vote for weapons programs again and again
and let them dump toxic waste where the young ones play.
GE made the bullets that shot JFK.

You contribute to this chain every time you buy a product
sponsered on this show.
That's what NBC doesn't want you to know.

So the next time... BEEP
Please stand by.
Please stand by.

It means there's technical difficulties
supposedly,
so if you see
a "Please Stand By",
you know it's all part of GE's big lie.

Why'd they take Norm MacDonald away?


Because he made too many jokes about O.J.,
but Lorne Michaels overruled.
Now don't be fooled.
He and Marion Barry
went to the same high school.

thinkers on du!

Obviously, you have that liberal flaw of having empathy - something some of our conservative 'friends' lack.

It's been just heartbreaking to see the events unfold in Japan. And their tragedy is just beginning. :cry:

Advancing technology in solar, wind and tidal sources might soon make them better alternatives.

... if Big Oil and the rethugs can keep their greedy obstructionist noses out of it.

A central PA resident, I've been in those ranks since TMI (actually, a bit before ...)

...against nuclear power I can assure you it's no fun saying "I told you so". Welcome to our side.

They use enriched uranium which is just too dangerous for use in commercial reactors.

anyone in America admitting they're wrong. Especially about Nuclear Power.

What is it about the lack of enough imagination to foresee a situation like this?

It isn't worth it. It never was.

The reactors in question in Japan are about 40 years old. Designs have improved substantially. The Canadian design CANDU is way better.