On 17/03/2011 5:59 AM, Gene wrote:
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 20:34:09 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 21:31:33 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 20:40:39 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 20:35:01 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 18:56:26 -0400,
wrote:

On 3/14/11 6:48 PM, True North wrote:
Was that you, Johnny.... always preaching about the benefits of nuclear
power?
Good I guess, as long as you don't have an earthquake.

I haven't been opposed to nuclear power. I live about 20 miles from one.
But this latest incident in Japan sure gives one pause.

I think the significant thing is that the problem wasn't the 9.0
earthquake, it was the tsunami. That makes most of the US reactors
somewhat immune to the biggest problem.

Except the one 5 miles from my house.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brunswi...rating_Station

Where is the fault that is going to cause the level 9 earthquake?

Old news.....

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2004/aug/10/science.spain

More.... and some of you folks North of here are at risk!

http://www.starnewsonline.com/articl...ail_newsletter

Funny. It does not have to be an earth quake for a containment vessel
to run out of water, or a 40 year old motor does not start in a backup
system. Fact is, given the harm they can do, there are a lot of unsafe
nuke pants out there that need big time upgrades.