| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#2
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Nuclear power anyone??
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, Harryk 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 i live within 100 miles of 2 of the top 10 worst in the country, limierick (about 20 miles) and 3 mile island. not looking forward to any problems |
|
#3
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nuclear power anyone??
bpuharic 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 i live within 100 miles of 2 of the top 10 worst in the country, limierick (about 20 miles) and 3 mile island. not looking forward to any problems You seem to be already affected. |
|
#4
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nuclear power anyone??
In article ,
says... 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, Harryk 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? Well, the one that runs under CT is supposed to be bigger and with more potential than the San Andreas Fault line.. It just doesn't hit as often... |
|
#5
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nuclear power anyone??
wrote in message ...
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, Harryk 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? Reply: Also the Japanese Nuke plant is 40 years old. We have learned a lot in that time. Does not require electricity to keep the emergency cooling water flowing these days. |
|
#6
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nuclear power anyone??
On 16/03/2011 11:56 AM, Califbill wrote:
wrote in message ... 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, Harryk 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? Reply: Also the Japanese Nuke plant is 40 years old. We have learned a lot in that time. Does not require electricity to keep the emergency cooling water flowing these days. Ya but the US has 23 of them exactly like the Japanese one. All still in service. That does not include the related models, just the identical ones. But agree, the model is obolete as you can't easily stop the chain reaction with these dinosaurs. |
|
#7
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nuclear power anyone??
In article ,
says... On 16/03/2011 11:56 AM, Califbill wrote: wrote in message ... 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, Harryk 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? Reply: Also the Japanese Nuke plant is 40 years old. We have learned a lot in that time. Does not require electricity to keep the emergency cooling water flowing these days. Ya but the US has 23 of them exactly like the Japanese one. All still in service. That does not include the related models, just the identical ones. But agree, the model is obolete as you can't easily stop the chain reaction with these dinosaurs. I saw a graphic about this particular design. There are not actually rods that can be pulled out and separated. the core is the material and it can be slowed down by putting separator plates in, but it's all still in one area... |
|
#8
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nuclear power anyone??
On 16/03/2011 4:42 PM, I_am_Tosk wrote:
In , says... On 16/03/2011 11:56 AM, Califbill wrote: wrote in message ... 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? Reply: Also the Japanese Nuke plant is 40 years old. We have learned a lot in that time. Does not require electricity to keep the emergency cooling water flowing these days. Ya but the US has 23 of them exactly like the Japanese one. All still in service. That does not include the related models, just the identical ones. But agree, the model is obolete as you can't easily stop the chain reaction with these dinosaurs. I saw a graphic about this particular design. There are not actually rods that can be pulled out and separated. the core is the material and it can be slowed down by putting separator plates in, but it's all still in one area... There are moderator rods on well designed reactors where a material tha surpresses nuetrons can be placed between the fuel rods. This dramatically reduces the energy output of the core. Yes, you actually push the rods in to stop the core reaction. Commonly called Control Rods.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_rod This reactor design, like the 23 ohers in the US do not have this feature and others. The real crime hear is polticians to allow old antiquate designed to operate probably past their originally indended liftimes. Oh ya, someone will say they were designed for 100 year or something, but what does man make that lasts a 100 years without heavy maintance and upgrading along the way? Further, they are now using newer high output MOX fuel in these things, using plutonium as part of the mix. Real fun stuff when it melts. I am no nuke expert, but know enough about science to know when poliicians and reporters are selling the wrong line. I didn't have any idea we were still running reactors designed in the 60's until this incident. As any 1/2 baked responsible idiot would not trust that. Clearly these nukes are being run until they drop. |
|
#9
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nuclear power anyone??
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. |
|
#10
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nuclear power anyone??
On 3/14/2011 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. There is not a no risk utopia. We have to learn to safely handle nuclear power, and coal, etc. Ultimately nuclear wins out. Japanese are not ultimate technologists. Our Nuclear Power Plants are a lot more sophisticated and more redundant safety. Solar and wind power have so far cost more for acquisition and maintenance etc than can be recouped. Solar nor wind can supply the needs for a Houston. Grow up and face reality that there is no zero risk energy supply let alone affordability. The ones persisting in this notion better make plans to grow fur and live in a cave and graze. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Thank you Obama, for Nuclear Power! | General | |||
| We're behind France in nuclear power and... | General | |||
| Repugs to “go nuclear” | General | |||
| Nuclear power boat | Power Boat Racing | |||
Hybrid Mode
