View Poll Results: Does this article reassure your faith in Nuclear Energy?

Voters
29. You may not vote on this poll
  • Nuclear power is safe.

    16 55.17%
  • Nuclear power is not safe at any price.

    10 34.48%
  • It reassures my faith in human arrogance.

    4 13.79%
  • Corporations, like TEPCO, can handle it.

    0 0%
  • TEPCO will be bankrupted without gov't bailout.

    2 6.90%
  • Corporations get profits, publc gets liabilities, status quo.

    5 17.24%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 47

Thread: Fukushima: Revisited

  1. #1
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:46 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,307

    Fukushima: Revisited

    News From AP | TBO.com=

    "About 200,000 tons of radioactive water - enough to fill more than 50 Olympic-sized swimming pools - are being stored in hundreds of gigantic tanks built around the Fukushima Dai-ichi plant. Operator Tokyo Electric Power Co. has already chopped down trees to make room for more tanks and predicts the volume of water will more than triple within three years."

    "Nuclear engineer and college lecturer Masashi Goto said the contaminated water buildup poses a long-term health and environmental threat. He worries that the radioactive water in the basements may already be getting into the underground water system, where it could reach far beyond the plant, possibly the ocean or public water supplies."

    "Some of the water ran into the ocean, raising concerns about contamination of marine life and seafood. Waters within a 20-kilometer (12-mile) zone are still off-limits, and high levels of contamination have been found in seabed sediment and fish tested in the area."

    If another earthquake is still a possibility, and a disastrous one, do you feel reassured?

    Is enough being done?

    Did this information surprise anyone?

    What does this imply about nuke power long term?

  2. #2
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:46 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,307

    Re: Fukushima: Revisited

    AP Interview: Japan nuke plant water worries rise

    This was the article title. I was surprised by the volume of contaminated water and the comments on groundwater contamination. It takes a long time for truth to find its way out, just like the water. I wonder if anyone has told the fish about the 12 mile exclusion zone so that they won't swim and eat in there, and then swim back out with their newfound contamination. Silly me, of course they have, or not. Ya think?

  3. #3
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Goldsboro,PA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,596
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Fukushima: Revisited

    It is truthful to say that NO form of power is 100% safe...
    And, I believe ,that despite all that has happened (TMI, Chernobyl, Japan), nuclear is among the safer sources of power.
    The problem is man, in his rush and greed, tosses craftsmanship to the winds.
    This he must work on.....as well as honesty and truthfulness...Without these, man cannot be trusted...and maybe he should not be allowed to play with the atom.....
    The UN should be monitoring the waters at the accident site, at Japan's expense.

  4. #4
    Professor
    Baralis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    MO
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 03:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,394
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Fukushima: Revisited

    I was just reading up on recent developments (or lack of) the other day. A question crossed my mind, why would man attempt to use something so dangerous that if something went wrong we were totally screwed and nothing man can to can fix it? The only answer I came up with is GREED. Who cares that we risk humanity and world health if we can make mad cash in the process! It really is sad mankind is willing to stoop so low.

  5. #5
    Sage
    AliHajiSheik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,390

    Re: Fukushima: Revisited

    Quote Originally Posted by Baralis View Post
    I was just reading up on recent developments (or lack of) the other day. A question crossed my mind, why would man attempt to use something so dangerous that if something went wrong we were totally screwed and nothing man can to can fix it? The only answer I came up with is GREED. Who cares that we risk humanity and world health if we can make mad cash in the process! It really is sad mankind is willing to stoop so low.
    Are you asking to discuss your premise or your conclusion?

  6. #6
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    37,134

    Re: Fukushima: Revisited

    nuclear is a lot better than fossil fuels. i'm hoping that we put some research money into thorium, which from what i've read seems to be a better technology.

  7. #7
    Professor
    Baralis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    MO
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 03:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,394
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Fukushima: Revisited

    Quote Originally Posted by AliHajiSheik View Post
    Are you asking to discuss your premise or your conclusion?
    Either I suppose

    http://fukushimaupdate.com/ground-un...lete-collapse/

    According to the Secretary of former Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan, the ground beneath Unit 4 has already sunk by about 31.5 inches since the disaster, and this sinking has taken place unevenly. If the ground continues to sink, which it is expected to, or if another earthquake of even as low as a magnitude six occurs in the region, the entire structure could collapse, which would fully drain the cooling pool and cause a catastrophic meltdown.

    “If Unit 4 collapses, the worse case scenario will be a meltdown, and a resultant fire in the atmosphere. That will be the most unprecedented crisis that man has ever experienced. Nobody will be able to approach the plants … as all will have melted down and caused a big fire,” said Murata during the interview. “Many scientists say if Unit 4 collapses, not only will Japan lie in ruin, but the entire world will also face serious damages.”
    While it may be a bit alarmist I still find it worrisome.

    *Edited to fix link

  8. #8
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:46 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,307

    Re: Fukushima: Revisited

    Quote Originally Posted by Helix View Post
    nuclear is a lot better than fossil fuels. i'm hoping that we put some research money into thorium, which from what i've read seems to be a better technology.
    Why not SOLAR? Local solar. PV panels on every rooftop. No more grid. Worldwide. Gov't sponsored and subsidized startup. Makes jobs locally. Who'd a thunk it? Jobs are local! Generates new monies locally. Saves monies in local economies. Saved monies likely spent in local economies. Why does that word "LOCAL" keep popping up? Is there a problem with Centralized Distribution of Energy?

  9. #9
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    37,134

    Re: Fukushima: Revisited

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveFagan View Post
    Why not SOLAR? Local solar. PV panels on every rooftop. No more grid. Worldwide. Gov't sponsored and subsidized startup. Makes jobs locally. Who'd a thunk it? Jobs are local! Generates new monies locally. Saves monies in local economies. Saved monies likely spent in local economies. Why does that word "LOCAL" keep popping up? Is there a problem with Centralized Distribution of Energy?
    solar and renewables are an important piece of the puzzle, too. they're building a windfarm outside my town, and it's absolutely awesome. i ride out sometimes to check out the progress. nuclear is also good for producing a lot of power, and that's what we need. i vote all of the above.

  10. #10
    Sage
    AliHajiSheik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,390

    Re: Fukushima: Revisited

    Quote Originally Posted by Baralis View Post
    Either I suppose

    Fukushima Update | Ground under Fukushima Unit 4 sinking, structure on verge of complete collapse


    While it may be a bit alarmist I still find it worrisome.

    *Edited to fix link
    Ok, I disagree with the premise that it is impossible to do anything if something goes wrong the world is screwed. Fukishima had an extraordinary set of circumstances to an island dependent on nuclear power for it's energy since it has basically no natural energy resources of it's own. If there were any country that should be scared of nuclear power, they would certainly be it.

    Also, whenever someone references most or many scientists without referencing which ones, I tend to disregard the statement as being from someone with an agenda. Also, since it was said by someone named Murita, who is not identified, all the more so. Is it serious, no doubt.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •