Originally posted by Steve Zodiac
Can't think pf other power sources that leave areas uninhabitable when they do go wrong... Enlighten me...
Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
Only nuclear can really leave entire areas uninhabitable, but it has to go truly spectacularly wrong for that to happen. There has only been 1 such accident(not counting Fukushima here as the radiation levels are safe as close as 2km to the plant) in over 6 decades of nuclear power.
And a lot of near misses, untested designs, proliferation, cyber attacks, human error can never really be considered safe. Then you have the waste that has to be got rid of and remains radioactive for a very long time.
You take the risk, however with desertification certainly going to happen and the improvements in photoelectric effect systems, etc. Seems an unneeded risk. When I was much younger, don't ask why I had a Geiger counter down where the nuclear subs used to be in Portsmouth before they all went to Scotland in the UK. Background radian was years after the subs had left six times as high. Now, remember tidal sink effect was going on, and it was still that high... I've also taken a Geiger counter to the microhabitat off Kent's reactor... Not as safe as you would expect.
Originally posted by Steve Zodiac
And a lot of near misses, untested designs, proliferation, cyber attacks, human error can never really be considered safe. Then you have the waste that has to be got rid of and remains radioactive for a very long time.You take the risk, however with desertification certainly going to happen and the improvements in photoelectric effect systems, etc. Seems an unneeded risk. When I was much younger, don't ask why I had a Geiger counter down where the nuclear subs used to be in Portsmouth before they all went to Scotland in the UK. Background radian was years after the subs had left six times as high. Now, remember tidal sink effect was going on, and it was still that high... I've also taken a Geiger counter to the microhabitat off Kent's reactor... Not as safe as you would expect.
Nuclear power doesn't really contribute to desertification. I'm not sure what you mean by photoelectric effect systems, but if you mean solar power, then it's still basically a pipe dream. Out of curiosity, how many microsieverts were you getting on your Geiger counter?
Lets see, 92 posts..
I "guess" the Op isn't a covert marketer being paid to post on message boards. His post sure smells funny though, at a time when pro-nuclear power arguments have popped up in every editorial section of every newspaper, and stories in every magazine and online blog (One had a professor blog about how he stood right in front of an air vent to prove how harmless it is), so there's definately a push to "normalize" the concept to the public..
Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
By that standard, nothing can really be considered safe. As for the waste, it needs to be stored safely or even destroyed.Nuclear power doesn't contribute to desertification. I'm not sure what you mean by photoelectric effect systems, but if you mean solar power, then it's still basically a pipe dream. Out of curiosity, how many microsieverts were you getting on your Geiger counter?
About 30 mSv in Portsmouth that severely increases cancer risk and about 42 in Kent. Re: Desertification and the photoelectric effect. Desertification will push clouds high and away from the belt between the Tropic of Cancer and northern Spain. Yeah, all solar cells create a pd via variants of the classic photoelectric effect experiment.
Originally posted by Steve Zodiac
About 30 mSv in Portsmouth that severely increases cancer risk and about 42 in Kent. Re: Desertification and the photoelectric effect. Desertification will push clouds high and away from the belt between the Tropic of Cancer and northern Spain. Yeah, all solar cells create a pd via variants of the classic photoelectric effect experiment.
Originally posted by Steve Zodiac
Yes, but they are aware and make excuses. Nothing wil ever find it's way to a news source and trust me, like with pollution levels. Nothing to see here, move along...
Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
I find it hard to believe that they'd just ignore it because the radiation levels you reported are 20-40 times higher than in freakin' Pripyat.
You would be shocked if you took a Geiger counter to your average hospital and just wandered round near nuclear medicine for an hour.
Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
I find it hard to believe that they'd just ignore it because the radiation levels you reported are 20-40 times higher than in freakin' Pripyat.
Why is it hard to believe when it's in the government's best interest to ignore it. Cancer rates rising a bit in an area and possibly settling a lawsuit here/there without admitting fault is cheaper than quarantining off a large area and cleaning it up. You can see radiation and it's not like people die immediately with those levels Steve noted, out of sight out of mind.