Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

That nuke plant is becoming a thing of major concern

---

Hello again, tom:

Since FOX is the only news available on the weekends, I'm forced to watch Neil Cavuto spin the news... He's talking about how we should go ahead with nuclear power here in spite of what happened in Japan.. Whaaaa??

Is he paying attention?? Of ALL the country's that have nuclear power, Japan built their reactors to withstand BIG earthquakes... As it turns out, they DON'T. Let me say that again, THEY DON'T!!

Before today, I included nukes on our list of power needs. I've since scratched them off. You did too, didn't you?

excon

Appears one of the reactor builds has fallen apart.
The outside concrete seems to of crumbled away.
BBC News - Japan earthquake: Explosion at Fukushima nuclear plant

Quote:

---

The Japanese government's chief spokesman, Yukio Edano, said the concrete building housing the plant's number one reactor had collapsed but the metal reactor container inside was not damaged.

---

Hello again, ben:

Specifically, what made the Japanese reactors safer is that they were built INSIDE a containment building. THAT'S the building that blew up. It's that building that protects the public from be irradiated IF a meltdown occurs and SOME of the melted material escapes the reactor chamber and out onto the reactor floor. It'll melt through the floor too, and now that the containment building is GONE, all HELL is going to break out.

I LIVE in the path of death that's on my way.

Excon

Bear in mind that the reactor building only really protects the workings from the elements.

The actual core itself is encased in feet thick steel and concrete.
There's a lot more to nuclear reactors than simple buildings.
In the 60's a UK reactor suffered a meltdown in two of it's fuel rods. This was contained and it continued to operate for many years afterwards.

Nuclear energy is very safe, but gets huge press when things go wrong, as in three mile island and Chernobal (yeah can't spoll it)
In those case there was a lot of other factors that cause the eventual accidents.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Curlyben

Nuclear energy is very safe, but gets huge press when things go wrong,

---

Hello again, ben:

In terms of the death they can cause, "very" safe isn't good enough for me. If it can't be absolutely safe, I'm going to pass.

excon

Nothing in life is absolutely safe, where would the fun in that be ?

You have more chance of being run over while walking on the side walk or even winning the Lottery, than being injured in a nuclear accident. Those are damn good odds..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Curlyben

Those are damn good odds..

---

Hello again, ben:

Easy for you to say. You live on the opposite side of the world. Should it melt down, and nobody is saying it won't, I LIVE directly in the path the plume of deadly radiation is liable to take.

excon

I'll wait to see how this plays out. During Chernobyl ,the core was breached . So far I've heard no evidence of that in Japan. The explosion took out the external walls... not the containment .Pumping sea water into the containment makes me think there is damage to the core ;but for the moment it is still contained .As you know;there is plenty of sea water in the area.. all they need is the generators to operate the pumps.

This reactor from what I've read is a 40 year old design. It's like driving an old Pinto . I'm in favor of 21st century design.

As you recall from reading my postings on the subject ;I am in favor of development of 'Breeder Reactors' .

Maybe I'll reconsider my position about building them on the 'Ring of Fire' . But if I think the rhetoric of the left is true... burning carbon based energy has done much more negative health damage to humans than any nuke .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, ben:

Easy for you to say. You live on the opposite side of the world. Should it melt down, and nobody is saying it won't, I LIVE directly in the path the plume of deadly radiation is liable to take.

Excon

---

I hear what your saying, but France is a major user of Nukes and they are within spitting distance of me.

Even if it did go phuft, there's still an ocean between you, so nothing to really get panicked about.

The UK was in the path of Chernobal, and we got away extremely lightly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

I'll wait to see how this plays out. During Chernobyl ,the core was breached . So far I've hearrd no evidence of that in Japan. The explosion took out the external walls... not the containment .Pumping sea water into the containment makes me think there is damage to the core ;but for the moment it is still contained .

---

Indeed

Quote:

---

This reactor from what I've read is a 40 year old design.

---

There are very few newer designs in commercial use, due to lack of government involvement in the nuclear industry.
After all why would the generators spend billions developing newer designs if they aren't licensed to deploy them.

Quote:

---

Maybe I'll reconsider my position about building them on the 'Ring of Fire' .

---

Pretty short sighted really, and Japan has a history of quakes, so something of this nature was only a case of waiting to happen.

Japan has just said that there has been no release of radiation and the metal containers are holding.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, ben:

Easy for you to say. You live on the opposite side of the world. Should it melt down, and nobody is saying it won't, I LIVE directly in the path the plume of deadly radiation is liable to take.

excon

---

Being the survivalist I know you are ,I'm surprised you don't have a bottle of potassium iodide tablets in your survival kit. Come to think of it ,most people should be taking iodine supplementation anyway (especially if you do not use sea salt ).

Isn't the Hanford site near Seattle ?

The last time nuke waste mixed with sea water this happened :

With a purposeful grimace and a terrible sound
He pulls the spitting high tension wire down, Godzilla!

Helpless people on subway trains
Scream BUG-EYED(MY GOD) as he looks in on them, Godzilla!

He picks up a bus and he throws it back down
As he wades through the buildings toward the center of town, Godzilla

Oh no, they say he's got to go
Go go Godzilla, yeah
Oh no, there goes Tokyo
Go go Godzilla, yeah

Oh no, they say he's got to go
Go go Godzilla, yeah
Oh no, there goes Tokyo
Go go Godzilla, yeah
Oh no, they say he's got to go
Go go Godzilla, yeah
Oh no, there goes Tokyo
Go go Godzilla, yeah
History shows again and again
How nature points up the folly of men
Godzilla(Blue Oyster Cult)

Oh great now another reactor on the same site is having more serious problems: BBC News - Japan quake: Fears for second nuclear reactor

Here's more details on what this could actually mean: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-12723092

My concern is with the people in the area being supplied with shelter ,food ,and pottable water.

The containment of these reactors were not constructed as well as the one at Three Mile Island,but much better than Chernobyl (which was a poorly designed system).
Within minutes ,half the core at TMI disintegrated .Although some radioative steam was released , assessments suggested it didn't have any real health or environmental impact.
A full meltdown of any of the Japanese plants cores would also release radioactive gases, but those tend to dissipate in the atmosphere. Since the wind currents go out to sea there is less danger to the highly populated areas of Japan .There is little danger to the good people of Washington State.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

There is little danger to the good people of Washington State.

---

Hello again, tom:

What you say is true, TODAY. But, not so for tomorrow. An expert on FOX just told me that Hanford is built to withstand a 7.1 earthquake. He said the one at Indian River near you wouldn't withstand a 9.0. There's a couple in California that'll crack like eggs when the big one hits, and they EXPECT it within the next 30 years. Clearly, a 9.0 IS within the realm of possibility... Is Indian River built on a fault?

Contrary to what you say, I think MANY of us are at risk.

excon

On radiation poisoning.

The good news is that the Japanese eat sea food and kelp... foods high in potassium iodide. This is the standard treatment for exposure to radioactive iodine .


The biggest threat is from caesium-137 which has been detected around the plant. It has a 30 year half life and easily gets into the food chain.The area around Chernobyl has high concentrations of it .

If you are going to be poisoned by radiation ,perhaps the one you should hope for is tritrium. The treatment for exposure ? Drink mass quantities of beer.
The Office of Health, Safety and Security

It's not Indian River... it's Indian Point on the Hudson River . One of the jets on 9-11 flew directly over the plant on it's way to the Twin Towers.
I live in the evacuation zone and hear the sirens when the systems are tested .

It was just denied re-licensing . It is an old plant and the issue appears to be how much water it consumes in the cooling process. An easy fix would be the construction of cooling towers .But opponents claim it would be too costly and too big (about the size of some of these windmills I've seen) .
But their real opposition is that it would be a remedy to their other opposition... that the plant consumes too much water and kills fish that accidentally get sucked in.

To my knowledge ,the closest fault line to Indian Point is the Ramapo Fault.It is a good 20-30 miles west of the Hudson and has been inactive for 200 years. I've never heard of a quake in this area approaching a 9.0.

Isn't it amazing that no matter where or how big the disaster it always comes back to discussing the US. Get a life guys, I think it has just been demonstrated that there are bigger things than the US at stake right now.

You are welcome to contribute your insights . A quick review of this posting shows that anything else was exhausted in a couple of comments.
The Japanese understand and have lived with the risks of living on the Pacific plate for centuries. Their island chain is a direct result of the same plate activities that created the quake and tsunami.

The nuclear reactor problem is the man made factor . That is why it has taken the bulk of the comments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

The nuclear reactor problem is the man made factor . That is why it has taken the bulk of the comments.

---

Could be Tom that was because you didn't take it seriously from the start.

At first sight you might think the nuclear reactor is the only man made problem, yes fairly stupid to site it in a place that is subject to earthquake, but, given the proximity to earthquake, tsunami is a japanese word, a concept they are only too familiar with, the whole country, sited where it is, carries with it a man made factor of a disaster waiting to happen.

You might think that given their preoccupation with making buildings earthquake proof they might have given some consideration to the desirability of building on a coastal plain that could be inundated.

I expect that this earthquake was thought to be one in a million or one in a million years but we have experienced two in the last decade so no one has any idea with what frequency this might happen. It means our whole idea of an idillic life by the sea needs serious thought and I have no doubt that in certain parts of the world, the whole ideal of sustainable development on a seismic fault needs to be rethought