So much for safe nuke power

[Wifezilla]

Many of the people you are hearing talking about the dangers of nuclear power in the press in the last few days all seem to be tied to George Sorros. Coincidence? Nope!

 

[Dunkopf]

Just a little perspective....

According to the news this morning, you get more exposure to radiation just living in Denver than the people in Japan near the nuclear reactor that were treated.

Not sure which news you're listening too. There are a few different types of radiation. Five if my memory serves correctly. The kind that comes from a nuclear power plant accidentally releasing coolant vapor into the atmosphere is much more lethal than the kind we get from being 5000' closer to the sun. I expect nuclear energy proponents to minimize this whole episode. It sounds like the Japanese have done a great job of controlling this one. Hopefully it won't get any worse.

I think this is it for further nuclear power in the USA though. It has reawakened the anti nuke contingent and it has made it so that investors in nuke energy will be very hesitant to invest money in something that takes 10 years from start to finish to complete. There is too much torch passing in DC. One administration may allow them to start construction, then the next shuts it down.

I can't see any way they will ever be able to guarantee the safety of a nuclear power plant. Sometimes the cost when lives are included is just too high. Some parts of our society value lives more than dollars and there are just enough of them to make a difference.

 

[Dunkopf]

Not to pee on anyone's parade regarding "safe" nuclear power, but Japan gets earthquakes ALL THE TIME. That's why many of their buildings are engineered the way they are. It's not a question on how safe nuclear power is, it's a question of WHY IN GOD'S NAME DID SOMEONE DECIDE TO BUILD NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS IN ONE OF THE MOST EARTHQUAKE PRONE REGIONS IN THE WORLD?!

Well, as has already been pointed out, developed countries are huge consumers of electricity. For a country that is as densely populated as Japan to supply enough electricity through coal would mean they would all have to wear respirators. With nuclear reactors they just have to wear radiation detectors and take iodine pills.

It's a tough problem. I guess they need to figure something out or reduce the earths population about 50%.

I'm sure the Japanese will do some redesigning after they analyze what failed and why it failed. I don't see where they have much of a choice with nuclear power.

As for the USA. I guess we will see more coal use and more drilling and fraccing however it's spelled. A bigger gas tax would be a good place to start. I mean we're paying it to the big oil companies so they can build nicer houses for their top people. Why not give it to the feds to improve our infrastructure? Make the USA a safer place with better communications and cut gas use at the same time. I know. It makes too much sense.

 

[Dunkopf]

Many of the people you are hearing talking about the dangers of nuclear power in the press in the last few days all seem to be tied to George Sorros. Coincidence? Nope!

No. Not at all. Sorros is on the correct side of most issues.

 

[Collector]

Many of the people you are hearing talking about the dangers of nuclear power in the press in the last few days all seem to be tied to George Sorros. Coincidence? Nope!

No. Not at all. Sorros is on the correct side of most issues.

sorros is on the right side of the issues! REALLY WOW.

 

[Wannabefree]

Many of the people you are hearing talking about the dangers of nuclear power in the press in the last few days all seem to be tied to George Sorros. Coincidence? Nope!

No. Not at all. Sorros is on the correct side of most issues.

 

[Dunkopf]

Many of the people you are hearing talking about the dangers of nuclear power in the press in the last few days all seem to be tied to George Sorros. Coincidence? Nope!

No. Not at all. Sorros is on the correct side of most issues.

sorros is on the right side of the issues! REALLY WOW.

I didn't say the right side. I said the correct side.

Of course that depends on your view. As usual that's just my opinion.

 

[Collector]

I have not known him to be on the [ correct ] right side of any issue, according to my belief system.
Just my opinion of course!

 

[patandchickens]

Many of the people you are hearing talking about the dangers of nuclear power in the press in the last few days all seem to be tied to George Sorros. Coincidence? Nope!

Have you somehow missed all the *international* "talk about the dangers of nuclear in the press in the last few days"?

It is not whoever this Sorros guy is (America is not the whole world). It is a rather obvious concern to come to the forefront given recent events.

Pat

 

[Dunkopf]

In America it tends to be more about dollars than about sense. Safety is an issue that has to be forced down corporate throats. I know it is really that way in most places. I remember when they first mandated seat belts. The auto industry said it would cost too much to weld a couple reinforcements on the floorboards and put some belts in to keep people form flying out of cars. Not only that you might get knocked unconscious and burn to death if you were strapped in vs having your head crushed. Then I got stationed in Germany in 82 and I was astonished to find that cars made in Europe didn't have safety glass or side impact bars or any kind of emission controls. So it isn't just America that has elements in their government that worship the dollar over human life. It is common in any country that has a faction in power that bends to corporate will.

That's one of the big reasons I'm leery of nuclear power generation. I'm afraid of deregulation that will allow builders to do what they want and play the odds. After all, every time a major corporation cuts corners and people die because of it there are never criminal charges brought up. They simply get a fine which is just a small % of their profits and go on their merry way. JMO