Ask Experts Questions for FREE Help !
Ask
    speechlesstx's Avatar
    speechlesstx Posts: 1,111, Reputation: 284
    Ultra Member
     
    #121

    Jun 23, 2011, 08:30 AM

    I can spot a rise in the creek, especially Turkey Creek behind my dad's house. But how does one measure a millimeter of sea level?
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,325, Reputation: 10855
    Expert
     
    #122

    Jun 23, 2011, 11:06 AM

    Nebraska Flooding Threatens Nuclear Plant - Yahoo! News

    Floods threaten Nebraska nuclear plants - Washington Times

    http://www.mbari.org/staff/oreilly/s...asurement.html

    Jean-Michel Cousteau : Ocean Adventures . In-depth: Climate Change and the Marine Environment | PBS

    Sea levels rising at fastest rate in 2,000 years - Telegraph

    Just food for thought.


    Rivers and Flooding Module 3 Environmental Geology

    Urbanization Effects on Flooding

    Urbanization has had a major impact on river systems! Many towns and cities are located next to major rivers and their tributaries. Many of these cities are sitting smack in the middle of flood plains! Highways, streets, parking lots, sidewalks, and buildings now cover large areas of ground surface-areas that "use to" absorb excess rain water, vegetated areas that slowed a stream's discharge rate.

    Now the hard-covered surfaces act as conduits for excess stormwater to rapidly travel over. The time between the peak rainfall and peak discharge (called lag time) decreased drastically! The result? Increased flooding!! And, if the lag time is short enough, "flash flooding" may occur. Major disaster!
    QLP's Avatar
    QLP Posts: 980, Reputation: 656
    Senior Member
     
    #123

    Jun 24, 2011, 01:36 AM

    Airspace Over Flooded Nebraska Nuclear Power Plant Still Closed


    "Asked about the FAA flight ban, Hanson it was due to high power lines and "security reasons that we can't reveal." He said the flight ban remains in effect."

    Security reasons?
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,706, Reputation: 173
    Ultra Member
     
    #124

    Jun 24, 2011, 02:51 AM
    Security reasons that's breaucraticesses for get out of there
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,325, Reputation: 10855
    Expert
     
    #125

    Jun 24, 2011, 08:13 AM

    They tried not telling you anything in Japan, and we all know how well that worked. The foreign aid boats had to retreat to a safe distance, and be scrubbed to prevent contamination.
    QLP's Avatar
    QLP Posts: 980, Reputation: 656
    Senior Member
     
    #126

    Jun 24, 2011, 01:13 PM

    Wouldn't want anyone to lose money, never mind the other costs...

    Fukushima Nuclear Fuel Leaking Into Groundwater, Tepco Says Barrier Too Expensive, Will Hurt Stock Price | Myweathertech.com
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #127

    Jun 24, 2011, 04:09 PM

    I just can't help but wonder how the compliant press would be reporting this if the President's name was Bush. 1993 another flood did damage to the Cooper plant . But the President then was Bill Clintoon so although it was covered ;it did not become a major story.

    The head of the NRC will be there Monday to inspect their flood preparations. That tells me that they don't see this as urgent. This is definitely not Japan. The Japanese did not have the prep time to deal with a rushing wall of water . The Nebraska plants are prepared for the flooding .

    This is also not Japan in that the operators of the Nebraska plants are not covering anything up.

    BTW ;I'm surprised the press has lost interest in the Japanese plants. The crisis is far from over . They got filters for the cooling water ;but the filters have failed . That means eventually they will fill the basement with contaminated water and will have no choice but to pump it into the Pacific.

    The Russians are suggesting the Chernobyl solution. That was enlisting suicide helicopter pilots to dump lead and concrete on the reactors to seal them.
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,706, Reputation: 173
    Ultra Member
     
    #128

    Jun 27, 2011, 10:24 PM
    We all know the solution, Tom, no more nuclear plants. So the Japs can encase their little disaster in concrete and go back to what? Generating electricity from coal. I feel a boom coming on, must go and buy some coal shares and ditch my uranium, oops! I forgot, those are already worth nothing
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,325, Reputation: 10855
    Expert
     
    #129

    Jun 28, 2011, 10:57 AM

    Maybe they should have built the concrete, and lead enclosure before they had a problem. We humans do things so backward, then wonder what happened when it goes wrong. Then we have to go through it again, and again until we get it right. Safety first, then buy the stock!
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,706, Reputation: 173
    Ultra Member
     
    #130

    Jun 28, 2011, 03:26 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by talaniman View Post
    Maybe they should have built the concrete, and lead enclosure before they had a problem. We humans do things so backward, then wonder what happened when it goes wrong. Then we have to go thru it again, and again until we get it right. Safety first, then buy the stock!
    I won't be investing in nuclear. You have just outlined the capitalistic, least cost model. We once had an airline with a perfect safety record owned by our government. What happened to it, it was privatised, now it is plagued with safety problems and they are saying they will operate from Asia. Least cost model, least safe model, least service model. I wouldn't buy the stock now.
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,325, Reputation: 10855
    Expert
     
    #131

    Jun 28, 2011, 08:06 PM

    It's the same thing with coal, and oil, profits before people, and even after people DIE, they roll them aside and keep making money. Do people really have to die or get injured so companies can make a profit?
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #132

    Jun 29, 2011, 02:21 AM

    Qantas is one of the highest rated airlines for safety and overall performance.
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #133

    Jun 29, 2011, 02:29 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by talaniman View Post
    Its the same thing with coal, and oil, profits before people, and even after people DIE, they roll them aside and keep making money. Do people really have to die or get injured so companies can make a profit??
    Profits are good . A company that doesn't profit doesn't exist long or hire employees for long. Energy profits are especially good . Most pension plans and 401-Ks are directly or indirectly invested in them.
    QLP's Avatar
    QLP Posts: 980, Reputation: 656
    Senior Member
     
    #134

    Jun 29, 2011, 02:36 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    Profits are good . A company that doesn't profit doesn't exist long or hire employees for long. Energy profits are especially good . Most pension plans and 401-Ks are directly or indirectly invested in them.
    And think of all the money they will save on pensions if the emplyees don't live long enough to quailify to get any...
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #135

    Jun 29, 2011, 04:06 AM

    I'd like to see the stats that shows being in the energy industry is a more dangerous occupation than some other more PC acceptable industries . I imagine it is probably in line or safer than agriculture,construction and transportation .
    speechlesstx's Avatar
    speechlesstx Posts: 1,111, Reputation: 284
    Ultra Member
     
    #136

    Jun 29, 2011, 06:31 AM

    Of the most dangerous jobs in the U.S. there isn't anything in the energy industry in the top 10. Sanitation workers, including recycling collectors, was no. 7.
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,325, Reputation: 10855
    Expert
     
    #137

    Jun 29, 2011, 08:34 AM

    So because the job doesn't make a list we should regard the deaths as the cost of doing business? That works great if you are a corporation, but not so great if its your loved on that died in preventable accidents. Especially when you find that company in violation of safety standards that were ignored, or the fines were insufficient to make changes for a safer environment.

    Like the BP oil spill, or the mining disaster in Virginia, or the refinery explosions in Texas to name a few, or even including the millions exposed over the years to dangerous chemicals, or materials who develop life threatening conditions, that change there lives and that of their families. Like coal miners, or residents of communities that living over sites of natural gas deposits, that they use frakking as a means to extract the gas.

    They could do better, and we all know it, no matter the industry, or occupation.
    speechlesstx's Avatar
    speechlesstx Posts: 1,111, Reputation: 284
    Ultra Member
     
    #138

    Jun 29, 2011, 09:29 AM

    Don't be so dramatic, Tal. No one is excusing occupational injuries or deaths.

    Safety is my field so I know the lengths corporations go to in order to insure a safe work place for their employees and the contractors they use. I see both ends of it as a seller of safety equipment and as a contractor - in oil country - held to those high safety standards required to set foot on their property. Those standards are what keeps the energy industry out of the top 10 most dangerous jobs.
    QLP's Avatar
    QLP Posts: 980, Reputation: 656
    Senior Member
     
    #139

    Jun 29, 2011, 10:30 PM

    To my mind it is a question of attitude. Of course profits are good, if they are generated responsibly. And yes there are Companies who have a genuine regard for the welfare of both their own employees and those of the general world community.

    Unfortunately there are also many companies for whom profit is all at any expense. Unproperly tested products, cost-cutting exercises without a thought to the consequences etc. For other companies health and safety issues are about doing whatever minimum they need to tick the boxes without real regard for whether they work. Probably part of the reason why some health and safety rules have gone so far beyond common sense as to be a joke. As long as we don't get sued mentality.

    There are still companies responsible for massive chemical leaks, tearing up natural resources without thought, failing to build in contingency safety plans etc. The indirect negative consequences of these activities won't get them on most dangerous job lists but the impact is still real.
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,706, Reputation: 173
    Ultra Member
     
    #140

    Jun 29, 2011, 11:30 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    Qantas is one of the highest rated airlines for safety and overall performance.
    That may have once been true Tom but recent performance has a list of problems that doesn't reassure me and management's intention to move maintenance and operational bases to Asia means it will become mediocre.

    They are now more interested in pursuing cut price operation than they are of providing a premium service

Not your question? Ask your question View similar questions

 

Question Tools Search this Question
Search this Question:

Advanced Search

Add your answer here.


Check out some similar questions!

Another rift in the Climate Change ranks [ 11 Answers ]

It seems the idea that man can affect the outcome in dealing with climate change is rapidly coming apart, even the guy who started the idea of global warming says nothing will be achieved at Copenhagen because the approach is fundamentally flawed Global warming 'godfather' goes cold on...

Climate change causes political revolt [ 25 Answers ]

An impending vote on cap and trade legislation has caused a revolt in the Australian parliament which could spill leadership of the key opposition party as the government attempts to stitch up its position ahead of Copenhagen. Abbott to challenge Turnbull This revolt is led by climate change...

Climate change scam uncovered? [ 75 Answers ]

Someone has seemingly hacked emails from the University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit that appear to show a conspiracy to hide data that doesn't fit the climate change rhetoric. And yes, the director of the unit has said the emails seem to be genuine. Some samples: Hiding and...

EU Agrees Climate Change [ 95 Answers ]

Hello Today ahead of a meeting in Copenhagen it was agreed that the EU will fund the improvement of the newer states to help them bring into line their emissons News Sniffer - Revisionista 'EU strikes climate funding deal' diff viewer (2/3) The essence is the EU will offer some 100bn...

Climate change 'crisis' clearing up [ 25 Answers ]

With a hat tip to Walter Williams for the heads up, from Senator James Inhofe's blog... As Williams points out this is nothing new - but it is getting clearer that behind this whole climate change 'crisis' is an agenda to be furthered at all cost, much like the left's obsession with...


View more questions Search