March 11th, 2011 @ 4:03AM
|2011 is a year that is not dissapointing when you look at it as the last days. Its only march and the mideast has exploded in a complete shakeup of dictators. earthquakes, sunamis, extreme gas prices, extreme food prices. And its only going to get worse |
Word To Your Mom
March 11th, 2011 @ 10:44AM
|2011 is a year that is not dissapointing when you look at it as the last days.|
Are you a professional handicapper for the Apocalypse now? Do you get together with the other nutjobs and reminisce about other years that coulda been...
"I thought '04-'05 was gonna be big what with the big tsunami and Katrina, but alas, I lost some money on that bet..."
Red State Cowboy
March 14th, 2011 @ 10:05AM
|Regardless, I feel really bad for the Japanese, especially those that are displaced. The country is overcrowded as it is, I can't imagine what it's going to take to help out 400,000 people now.|
I'm glad the USA is at the frontlines helping in this whole mess. They haven't done anything to deserve this disaster which is apparently getting worse. Sure, they tried to take over the world 70 years ago but they've been good and have been very worthy competitors.
And it's not the end of the world, they'll recover. The problem with modern times is that when a natural catastrophe hits, we have sensitive technology that can obliterate an entire population just waiting for something to go wrong.
Sadly, this bolsters the debate against nuclear technology, as well. Great.
March 15th, 2011 @ 11:21AM
The Land of Chocolate
|Sadly, this bolsters the debate against nuclear technology, as well. Great.|
It's sad because given the catastrophic disaster that just occurred, the Nuclear Power Plants and the prospect of future disaster have been kept manageable. It's almost like this is one of those 0.00001% freak events, the Plant is holding up, and people are still weary.
If that was a coal/natural gas plant, the death totals, in my opinion, would have been catastrophic - and the long-term effects would be at least a magnitude worse than what is currently occurring with the Nuclear Plant.
March 15th, 2011 @ 1:33PM
|The media really is overblowing the whole thing. The situation is bad, but not as catastrophic (yet) as they claim. I think one of the big issues is that a reporter for AP or Reuters misunderstands a quote by an expert (for example, the fuel being exposed) and then writes an article that really doesn't explain what it means, however uses scary words (completely exposed, meltdown, release of radiation) that all have a meaning in the nuclear field, but they are not being used correctly. Other news services (FOX News, CNN, NY Times) then take these poorly written articles and use them as proof that the sky is falling. You can use some of the following examples to determine whether or not the reporter/writer has a clue:|
-Claiming that people are being exposed to radiation, or that radiation is being released. The correct term is contamination. Contaminated material is being released to the atmosphere, creating airborne contamination. This is what is getting on people (those 17 sailors) and being detected. You are exposed to radiation during an x-ray, or the first instants after detonation of a nuclear bomb. Everything else is essentially contamination ("fallout", though that term also tends to induce panic)
-The reactors are undergoing meltdown (which will lead to Chernobyl/TMI/end of the world as we know it). First off, meltdown is not really a term defined in the nuclear world. It's generally used to create FUD and invoke images of a China Syndrome-ish scenario. Those cores could be considered undergoing a partial meltdown where the fuel assemblies are decomposing due to the inability to effectively remove the decay heat after shutdown. This will occur when the water level drops and the fuel becomes uncovered (which is what the press means when they say "exposed"). These uncovered fuel assemblies then will start decomposing. In highly enriched reactors, there is some worry that this could possibly lead to the reactors regaining criticality, but civilian reactors do not have the necessary enrichment to occur. So you'd then have a hot slag heap at the bottom of the toroid which is itself contained in a steel-reinforced concrete container. It will not melt through the toroid, it will not melt through the concrete, it will not melt through the ground and come out the other side of the earth.
-The explosions indicate something Very Bad is about to happen. The explosions where essentially designed failures. Some contamination was released, but the secondary containment buildings were designed with blowout panels to allow this to happen. Is this situation ideal? No. Did contamination get released? Yes. Will people get harmed by this release? That's a tricky question, but the numbers I've heard indicate that the amount released is very small, and that your annual exposure from just being alive greatly exceeds what you'll see from the area around the plant. Maybe we'll have 1 or 2 extra cases of cancer in 30 years than we would have. I don't think the danger is, at the moment, statistically significant...as in, you'll have a higher chance of dying in a plane crash exactly 5 minutes and 7 seconds after joining the mile high club than you will of dying from what's going on in Japan.