YOU CANNOT POST. OUR WEB HOSTING COMPANY DECIDED TO MOVE THE SERVER TO ANOTHER LOCATION. IN THE MEANTIME, YOU CAN VIEW THIS VERSION WHICH DOES NOT ALLOW POSTING AND WILL NOT SAVE ANYTHING YOU DO ONCE THE OTHER SERVER GOES ONLINE.

Discussion of Nuclear Power and Safety - Page 7 - Dhamma Wheel

Discussion of Nuclear Power and Safety

A place to bring a contemplative / Dharmic perspective and opinions to current events and politics.
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 14947
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Discussion of Nuclear Power and Safety

Postby mikenz66 » Sun Mar 20, 2011 10:06 pm

Thanks Christopher::: that's a helpful chart. It's always useful to have an idea of the real data. It clearly explains why this is potentially more serious for the public than Three Mile Island and what the natural radiation exposures are (though of course, these vary a depending on what sort of soil/rock you live on, how your house is constructed, and so on, e.g. whether you have exposed bricks inside your house...).

:anjali:
Mike

User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4346
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Discussion of Nuclear Power and Safety

Postby Kim OHara » Sun Mar 20, 2011 11:11 pm


chownah
Posts: 6161
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Discussion of Nuclear Power and Safety

Postby chownah » Thu Mar 24, 2011 2:45 am

Probably everyone has seen this already since its from Yahoo news but here is a link to a story titled "AP IMPACT: US spent-fuel storage sites are packed"

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110323/ap_ ... FjdHVzc3A-

For me the most interesting point in the article is that the US has been planning to open a "permanent" storage facility under Yucca Mountain (although there has been alot of public resistenct to its creation and perhaps it will not be built at all but who knows?) and that the AMOUNT OF WASTE ALREADY IN TEMPORARY STORAGE IS ENOUGH TO COMPLETELY FILL THE PROPOSED CAPACITY AT YUCCA MOUNTAIN.

There is no permanent storage presently and the attempts to create one have not even been able to keep up with the demand even when the US gets less than 20% of its electricity from nuclear...and when presently there are only a few decomissioned reactors....even if no knew reactors are built the amount of waste needing storage will increase alot in the near future since there will be more decomissionings in the future than there were in the past and the plants will on average be much bigger with alot more spent fuel......imagine how big the probelm would be if the US went hog wild into nuclear!!!!!!

Fearing the accumulation of nuclear waste is not paranoia as the danger is real and growing every day....

chownah

PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: Discussion of Nuclear Power and Safety

Postby PeterB » Thu Mar 24, 2011 8:29 am


Jhana4
Posts: 1309
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 5:20 pm
Location: U.S.A., Northeast

Re: Discussion of Nuclear Power and Safety

Postby Jhana4 » Thu Mar 24, 2011 3:31 pm

The French have had a very extensive investment in nuclear power for a long time, giving them a lot of experience with the known issues. Given that, I consider their attitude about nuclear power to have a little more weight.
In reading the scriptures, there are two kinds of mistakes:
One mistake is to cling to the literal text and miss the inner principles.
The second mistake is to recognize the principles but not apply them to your own mind, so that you waste time and just make them into causes of entanglement.

chownah
Posts: 6161
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Discussion of Nuclear Power and Safety

Postby chownah » Fri Apr 01, 2011 1:45 am

There have been many comments in this thread that claimed that renewables can not provide the bulk of the electric power for a country....below is a link to a Yahoo article that claims that in the month of March, 2011 in Spain MORE THAN 60% OF THE ELECTRIC POWER CAME FROM RENEWABLES NAMELY WIND, HYDRO, AND SOLAR......

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110331/sc ... 93ZXJpbnM-

PLease note that every year the cost of renewables goes down and the efficiency of renewables goes up.....while every year it seems the cost of nuclear goes up and I don't know about the efficiency of nuclear....
chownah

User avatar
christopher:::
Posts: 1326
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:56 am

Re: Discussion of Nuclear Power and Safety

Postby christopher::: » Sun Apr 03, 2011 11:12 am

Some related articles...



"Six times, Sergei Belyakov says, he has been through the doorway to hell and back. The Ukrainian-American was a volunteer "jumper" who helped clean up after the nuclear disaster in the town of Chernobyl in the former Soviet Union in April, 1986. These are people who jump into a radioactive area to clear debris or mend pipes and run to safety before radiation reaches lethal levels.

Tokyo Electric Power Co (TEPCO) is trying to get jumpers -- reportedly for $5,000 a day -- to bring its damaged nuclear power plant in northern Japan under control after it was severely damaged by last month's earthquake and tsunami, the world's worst nuclear crisis since Chernobyl. Six times during his 40-day tenure at Chernobyl, Belyakov was one of the hundreds crouching in the covered stairway leading to the roof of nuclear reactors 3 and 4. Outside, radioactivity was so high that it could kill within minutes.

"The guy (at the door) tells you, you go here, you do this, you go around this, this ladder is not good so don't go there because you may fall with it. You mentally imprint what you need to do, you follow that. Then you run." He would hack away at highly toxic asphalt on the roof and toss it down to be buried, but for a very limited time. The longest he spent on the roof was two minutes, the shortest between 30-40 seconds. "The guy yells (to) you or you have your own judgment (to come back). Once you are done, you go down. There were 700-900 people collected on that staircase. It was a moving, never-ending chain of people."



Associated Press – Fri Apr 1, 2011

BERLIN – "For a look at just how long radioactivity can hang around, consider Germany's wild boars. A quarter century after the Chernobyl nuclear disaster in the Soviet Union carried a cloud of radiation across Europe, these animals are radioactive enough that people are urged not to eat them. And the mushrooms the pigs dine on aren't fit for consumption either.
Germany's experience shows what could await Japan — if the problems at the Fukushima Dai-ichi plant get any worse.
The German boars roam in forests nearly 950 miles (1,500 kilometers ) from Chernobyl. Yet, the amount of radioactive cesium-137 within their tissue often registers dozens of times beyond the recommended limit for consumption and thousands of times above normal.

"We still feel the consequences of Chernobyl's fallout here," said Christian Kueppers, a radiation expert at Germany's Institute for Applied Ecology in Freiburg. "The contamination won't go away any time soon — with cesium's half-life being roughly 30 years, the radioactivity will only slightly decrease in the coming years." Cesium can build up in the body and high levels are thought to be a risk for various other cancers. Still, researchers who studied Chernobyl could not find an increase in cancers that might be linked to cesium."




TOKYO (Reuters)- "When the massive tsunami smacked into Fukushima Daiichi, the nuclear power plant was stacked high with more uranium than it was originally designed to hold and had repeatedly missed mandatory safety checks over the past decade. The Fukushima plant that has spun into partial meltdown and spewed out plumes of radiation had become a growing depot for spent fuel in a way the American engineers who designed the reactors 50 years earlier had never envisioned, according to company documents and outside experts...

When the quake hit, almost 4,000 uranium fuel assemblies were stored in deep pools of circulating water built into the highest floor of the Fukushima reactor buildings, according to company records. Each assembly stands about 3.5 meters high and even a decade after use emits enough radiation to kill a person standing nearby. The spent radioactive fuel stored in the reactors represented more than three times the amount of radioactive material normally held in the active cores of the six reactors at the complex, according to Tokyo Electric briefings and its presentation to the IAEA.

The build-up of used fuel rods in the Fukushima reactor buildings has complicated the response to the continuing crisis at the complex and deepened its severity, officials and experts have said. That has been especially the case at the No. 4 reactor, which was out of service at the time of the quake and had some 548, still-hot fuel assemblies cooling in a pool of water on its upper floor. That reactor, which erupted into explosive flames twice last week, triggered a warning from U.S. officials last week about higher risks for radiation from the stricken plant than Japanese officials had disclosed.

David Lochbaum, a nuclear engineer with the U.S.-based Union of Concerned Scientists, said the spent fuel was vulnerable because it was protected only by the relatively "flimsy" outer shell of the reactors and reliant on a single, pump-driven cooling system. "It's a recipe for disaster and that disaster is now unfolding in Japan," Lochbaum said. The pile-up of used radioactive fuel stored at Fukushima underscores a dilemma that the nuclear power industry has faced in Japan and in the United States for decades: there is no easy answer to the question of where to store radioactive nuclear fuel after it has been used to produce power..."



July, 2009

"A few hundred thousand people may have died as a result of radiation from at least 40 nuclear explosions carried out between 1964 and 1996 at the Lop Nur site in Xinjiang, which lies on the Silk Road. Almost 20 million people reside in Xinjiang, and Tohti believes that they offer unique insight into the long-term impact of radiation, including the relatively little studied genetic effects that may be handed down over generations. He is establishing the Lop Nur project at Sapporo Medical University in Japan with physicist Jun Takada to evaluate these consequences.

Takada has calculated that the peak radiation dose in Xinjiang exceeded that measured on the roof of the Chernobyl nuclear reactor after it melted down in 1986. Most damage to Xinjiang locals came from detonations during the 1960s and 1970s, which rained down a mixture of radioactive material and sand from the surrounding desert. Some were three-megaton explosions, 200 times larger than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima, says Takada, who published his findings in a book, Chinese Nuclear Tests (Iryo ka gakusha, 2009)."




Associate Press, Published: Sunday, Nov. 7, 2004

BOISE — For much of her childhood, Sheri Garman drank poisoned milk. Like many other children in eastern Idaho in the 1950s, Garman and her family drank locally produced raw milk. But the cows on Garman's family dairy and other regional dairies were ingesting radioactive fallout from Cold War nuclear testing in Nevada, and passing on the radiation to humans through their milk.

"Radiation fallout was like dew on the grass," Garman told researchers with National Academies Board on Radiation Effects Research during a hearing for downwinders — the Idaho residents believed to be suffering radiation-related health problems. "We are the poster children for the radiation that came to Idaho, yet we are not included in RECA," she said.

The National Academy of Sciences agreed to accept testimony in Idaho about the impact fallout had on residents' health in response to hundreds of letters. The hearing in Boise Saturday drew hundreds of downwinders. The compensation act provides a $50,000 payment to residents with certain kinds of cancers who lived in 21 counties in southern Utah, Nevada and Arizona during the testing. Not included under the act are the four Idaho counties — Blaine, Gem, Custer and Lemhi — which received some of the highest levels of iodine-131, one of the radioactive elements released by the tests, according to a 1997 National Cancer Institute Study.

Garman said the exposure left her with thyroid cancer, followed by breast cancer. When the breast cancer recently spread, doctors told her she could expect to live between 18 and 24 more months. "If I meet the statistics, I will die by this time next year," Garman told the scientists. "Cancer is knowing that it will take more than modern medicine for me to see my daughter's wedding. I'm fighting terminal cancer that could have been avoided."



Image



British nuclear tests at Maralinga occurred between 1955 and 1963 at the Maralinga site, part of the Woomera Prohibited Area, in South Australia. A total of seven major nuclear tests were performed, with approximate yields ranging from 1 to 27 kilotons of TNT equivalent. The site was also used for hundreds of minor trials, many of which were intended to investigate the effects of fire or non-nuclear explosions on atomic weapons. The site was contaminated with radioactive materials and an initial cleanup was attempted in 1967. The McClelland Royal Commission, an examination of the effects of the tests, delivered its report in 1985, and found that significant radiation hazards still existed at many of the Maralinga test areas. It recommended another cleanup, which was completed in 2000 at a cost of $108 million. Debate continued over the safety of the site and the long-term health effects on the traditional Aboriginal owners of the land and former personnel.

Image

See also:





"Federal science minister Peter McGauran was almost incontinent with joy in 2003 — the clean-up of the plutonium-contaminated British atomic bomb testing site at Maralinga in South Australia's remote north had "achieved its goals", exceeded "world's best practice" and was "something Australia can be proud of". Not so happy, however, was nuclear engineer Alan Parkinson, whose book Maralinga: Australia's Nuclear Waste Cover-up shows that the "clean-up" was more a "cover-up" of a cost-cutting dumping of hazardous radioactive waste in shallow holes in the ground.

Seven of the 12 British atomic bombs exploded on Australian territory 50 years ago were at Maralinga in 1956 and 1957. Even more so than the bomb tests, it was the hundreds of related trials, which continued until the mid-1960s, that contaminated 100 square kilometres of land with plutonium and other radioactive elements. Twenty-four kilograms of highly dangerous plutonium was used but only 0.9kgs was repatriated to Britain. The remainder was spread over a wide area, while thousands of tonnes of plutonium-contaminated debris (concrete, steel, cable, etc) lay in poorly covered bare earth pits following inadequate British clean-ups, the last in 1967."
"As Buddhists, we should aim to develop relationships that are not predominated by grasping and clinging. Our relationships should be characterised by the brahmaviharas of metta (loving kindness), mudita (sympathetic joy), karuna (compassion), and upekkha (equanimity)."
~post by Ben, Jul 02, 2009

User avatar
Annapurna
Posts: 2639
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 8:04 pm
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: Discussion of Nuclear Power and Safety

Postby Annapurna » Sun Apr 03, 2011 3:30 pm

Attachments
Only when the last tree has died.jpg
Only when the last tree has died.jpg (374.5 KiB) Viewed 4033 times
http://www.schmuckzauberei.blogspot.com/

chownah
Posts: 6161
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Discussion of Nuclear Power and Safety

Postby chownah » Mon Apr 04, 2011 12:53 pm

At Yahoo news today it was reported that in Japan they are intentionally dumping radioactive water into the ocean to free up storage space for more radioactive water....this is disturbing...I do understand the need for this and I do understand that if they are actually dumping low level waste as they claim (how will anyone really know what level the waste is that gets dumped) then the danger is pretty minimal....but think of the precedent this is setting....this makes it just that much easier for other nuclear plants to just plan on dumping their waste in any conveniently located body of water...and what to me is particularly disturbing is this statement:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110404/ts ... N0YXJ0c2Q-

"...
Government spokesman Yukio Edano said it was the only available option.

"We have no choice but to release water tainted with radioactive materials into the ocean as a safety measure," Edano said.
......"

This is particularly disturbing in that they are trying to spin this as a "safety measure"....I think they actuallly want us to develop the mind set that dumping radioactive waste into the ocean is a safe thing to do....that it is a safety measure....that it is safe....perhaps it should be written into the books as a safe way to run nuclear power plants in the future....as standard operating procedures....

There are quite a few nuclear power plants within spitting distance of oceans and seas....is one of the reasons for this that the designers consider that waste can just be dumped into the ocean if some good rationale can be developed to justify that?....how long will it take before financial considerations are considered justification for wholesalel dumping of radioactive waste into convenient bodies of water?.....I am not paranoid about what is happening in Japan with this but it is a disturbing event when dumping untreated radioactive waste into the ocean is considered to be a "safety measure".....does Japan think that they have their very own private ocean??/????

chownah

User avatar
christopher:::
Posts: 1326
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:56 am

Re: Discussion of Nuclear Power and Safety

Postby christopher::: » Mon Apr 04, 2011 4:18 pm

"As Buddhists, we should aim to develop relationships that are not predominated by grasping and clinging. Our relationships should be characterised by the brahmaviharas of metta (loving kindness), mudita (sympathetic joy), karuna (compassion), and upekkha (equanimity)."
~post by Ben, Jul 02, 2009

User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4346
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Discussion of Nuclear Power and Safety

Postby Kim OHara » Mon Apr 04, 2011 9:29 pm


User avatar
octathlon
Posts: 599
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 5:06 am
Location: USA

Re: Discussion of Nuclear Power and Safety

Postby octathlon » Tue Apr 05, 2011 12:02 am

The situation continues to go from bad to worse and at this point they're playing it by ear. Yeah, it's pretty bad when you deal with a nuclear accident by making it up as you go along. :evil: Have you read about their efforts to plug up the cracks by pouring different kinds of stuff in it, even trying the absorbent stuff used in baby diapers? didn't work of course. It reminds me of the BP spill last year. :roll:

User avatar
christopher:::
Posts: 1326
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:56 am

Re: Discussion of Nuclear Power and Safety

Postby christopher::: » Tue Apr 05, 2011 2:06 am

"As Buddhists, we should aim to develop relationships that are not predominated by grasping and clinging. Our relationships should be characterised by the brahmaviharas of metta (loving kindness), mudita (sympathetic joy), karuna (compassion), and upekkha (equanimity)."
~post by Ben, Jul 02, 2009

chownah
Posts: 6161
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Discussion of Nuclear Power and Safety

Postby chownah » Mon Oct 24, 2011 3:21 am

I read an article at Yahoo which reminded me of this topic....remember this one?....lots of opinions about how the Japanese power plants certainly would not have major problems and the problems would be insignificant....and also some opinions about how alternative energy is totally inadequate etc. etc.........

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Solar-pow ... et=&ccode=

Title:
Solar power is beginning to go mainstream
The biggest cloud hanging over the solar industry, the high cost of panels, is finally lifting

Excerpt:
".........
Solar panels, which are priced based on the amount of power they can produce during full sunshine, sold for $1.34 per watt in mid-September, according to data from Bloomberg New Energy Finance. That's down from $1.90 at the beginning of 2010. In 2008, they sold for $4 a watt. ...................
...........
General Electric Co., Samsung and other big companies are entering the market. This should increase supply and bring down costs even further. GE announced this month that it would build the largest panel factory in the U.S., near Denver.
................."

chownah
P.S. If battery powered vehicles become mainstream they will perform the second critical factor to put solar over the top which is storage......the first critical factor is of course cost which is addressed above.
chownah

User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4346
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Discussion of Nuclear Power and Safety

Postby Kim OHara » Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:32 am


User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4346
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Discussion of Nuclear Power and Safety

Postby Kim OHara » Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:41 am

Meanwhile at Fukushima:
Scientific American
New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/01/world ... plant.html

:thinking:
Kim

User avatar
octathlon
Posts: 599
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 5:06 am
Location: USA

Re: Discussion of Nuclear Power and Safety

Postby octathlon » Mon Oct 24, 2011 10:48 pm


User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4346
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Discussion of Nuclear Power and Safety

Postby Kim OHara » Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:17 pm


User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4346
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Discussion of Nuclear Power and Safety

Postby Kim OHara » Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:28 pm


chownah
Posts: 6161
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Discussion of Nuclear Power and Safety

Postby chownah » Fri Nov 04, 2011 3:02 pm

They still don't have a plan for how to dispose of the radioactive waste:
http://news.yahoo.com/japans-crisis-rad ... 25z;_ylv=3

"Goshi Hosono, the country's nuclear crisis minister, said Friday that Japan has yet to come up with a comprehensive plan for how to dispose of the irradiated waste that has been accumulating since the March 11 earthquake and tsunami."

AND IT IS STILL LEAKING RADIATION:
"Officials say that — almost eight months later — the plant has been restored to a relatively stable condition and is leaking far less radiation than it did in the early days of crisis. They hope to achieve a "cold shutdown" — with each reactor's temperature below 212 Fahrenheit (100 C) — by the end of the year."

AND THE TECHNOLOGIES TO PROCESS THE WASTE HAVE NOT YET EVEN BEEN DEVELOPED:
""We still don't have a full picture of how to deal with the waste," he said. "It would require research and development that may take years. "

chownah


Return to “News, Current Events & Politics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

Google Saffron, Theravada Search Engine