what you are saying is that nuclear power is responsible for California's smug problems?
/facepalm
is anyone talking about the fact that these were reactors built in the 60s, when nuclear power was in its infancy?
though, don't get me wrong, this event does temper my pro-nuclear stance a little. Obviously, there is no 100% safe, so lets not build nuclear plants anywhere they are going to get flooded.
I don't know. The reactors were build to withstand up to an 8.5 quake. They got hit by an 8.9 quake (four times as powerful) and a tsunami. Half of the reactors came through perfectly fine. If there's ever a tsunami where I live (15km inland) I'd try to find a nuclear plant to hide in.
Though yes, this obviously shows the potential for problems. But this would be an extreme outlier case.
__________________
Graffiti outside Latin class.
Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
A juvenal prank.
I suppose I'm more saying that this changes my "nuclear power is always awesome" stance to "ok, maybe there are some problems".
I hadn't really thought of all out doomsday scenarios like this one, and I know for a fact that reactors built by Canadian manufacturers have better safeguards than those in Japan (CANDU reactors, iirc)
You should come to the Bay Area, so many assholes driving a Prius and they assume they should get special treatment and considerations cos they drive one. They're almost like Mac users, ever ready to tell you they drive one and how superior it is to what you got.
IMO, they should built nuclear-reactors (or retrofit older ones) to withstand Ragnarok, considering the potential damage they can cause when they malfunction as seen with Chernobyl.
Nuclear Meltdowns... Pfft. That is hardly a danger. There have been a bit over a dozen of such incidents and most have caused little harm or impact on the evnironment and people. Really, aside from Chernobyl, there really haven't been that many major incidents. IMO, the problem with nuclear power is the nuclear waste.
No. The danger of nuclear meltdowns is way overblown. For example, almost everyone knows about Three Mile Island and how it was one of the worst nuclear accidents ever. The truth of the matter is no one was killed or even injured. Heck, when someone goes to the doctor and gets X-rayed they are exposed to more radiation then if they had lived near the Island when it "blew".
And of course, standards and equipment have increased over time. Making such an incident less likely to occur.
That’s not to say nuclear power is perfect, it’s not. But nuclear meltdowns are hardly the biggest problem with nuclear power.
Although I was always under the impression that the reason the danger is so low is BECAUSE people worry so much ('overblown' as you put it). Or how many times does charnobyl have to happen for something to be serious? Like nuclear war - if we were all just a little more relaxed about it, we'd already have been to hell and back.
You still have to admit that "People" worrying made no difference in this situation.
The Japansese have certainly established protocols and regulations that should likely govern ever national standard, but those standards have failed in this case. Those developed standards always will fail.
I agree that we assume the idea of mutually armed college students makes no sense, especially when we appply it to our own foreign poliy AND our nuclear policy. We hate anyone else has "THE BOMB"..while ignoring we developed it, love everyone has a gun, stop everyone else (except those we support) from getting it, and are now trying to stop our enemies from using them on us.
Why would a MAC user think they are superior, MAC´s are overpriced & slower than PC´s. No wonder they are starting to put Intel chips in them.
Another building blew up last night (depending where you are). And they are saying there container is damaged this time. Friggin hell are all of them going to go up on that site?
Mr Murphy has definetly been visiting Japan the past week.
__________________ Recently Produced and Distributed Young but High-Ranking Political Figure of Royal Ancestry within the Modern American Town Affectionately Referred To as Bel-Air.
That presumes (mostly likely falsely) that god was existant enough to responsible.
So "his" forgiveness is quite unnecessary.
If anything, things like this are massive ammo argument against an intervening, petitionable god.
It would make more sense to be mad at Earth and her tectonic plate system...or the engineers who put an evidently delicate nuclear reactor in an unstable zone where tonnes of seismic activity goes on...
Remind me to ask Sadako of Girth about God's existence before I pray, and I appreciate your forgiveness - it's precisely what I prayed for While you're at it why don't you let me know which candidates on the ballot actually exist?
Though I find your certainty presumptuous, I see where you're coming from, and I reserve my right to be angry at God whether he exists or not!
I was wondering if there actually people working at these Nuclear power plants trying to get them under control. And what do they do when one blows up, are they aware of the impending explosion because of guages and do a runner until it´s over?
Not only that, what sort of person voluntarily participates in such work? They could offer x ammount of money, I´d wouldn´t go near the place.
KMC Community Forums
Mar 14th, 2011 08:34 PM
And his law governs all over there right now, by the looks of it.
)
While you're at it why don't you let me know which candidates on the ballot actually exist?
