Nuclear Power Needs To Go

[modge]

So lets go back to what I said to begin with. The nuclear industry telling the general public about deaths caused by working in labs and nuclear plants. I don't think so. The next time I meet my cousin I will ask him about cover ups. He will tell me If he knows anything, he would trust me with his life and knows that what he tells me it doesn't go any further.. A doctor of physics at 22. Keble college Oxford. I last spoke to him several months ago. He told me at the moment he was overseeing the decommissioning of nuclear plants. Have any contact here? tell them about a conversation on the web. And has many knows the internet is not magical. Everything is not on the web. Also forget what he had to sign when he took up the job. Cover ups of course there's cover ups. So you believe what you like. I don't give a monkeys. But I will be told what he knows.

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by sheltiedave

Here is a background about the T building...

http://www.manhattanprojectvoices.or...nel-discussion

I have that one in my files on the Mound and as far as I am concerned that was a PR attempt by the people in charge to deny that anyone ever suffered radiation poisoning at the Mound. Yet the Dayton newspapers had many stories of people who lived near the site dying of cancer when there was no record of cancer in their families. Tritium, one of the things used in detonators at the time, exists as a gas and it was released accidentally more than once.

I have shown the NIOSH work to an advisor who has worked on many of the cases from Mound workers. His comment on reading the Dose Reconstruction document was that its author deserves the Nobel prize for Fiction. AFAIK the Dept of Labor EEOIC group 's sole function is to deny all claims, should be renamed EEOID.

I have read just about every document available on the T building. If II was to believe them that building only ever had two floors. They never talk about all the floors that were deep underground. The lab opposite the one where my Florence worked became so contaminated they sealed it, but the damage had already been done.

The decontamination and decommissioning of that site has just about doubled the first cost estimate. Documentation is missing because according to the stories they became contaminated and were sent to Los Alamos for burial.

[Oerets]

Any sane intelligent person when looking at Nuclear see the dangers now. Going back to Curie the dangers were known. They lie and cover up to further their own interests, financial or personal. Same is still in practice today in just the use of nuclear and Xrays in the health industry. The use of fossil fuels and on and on, the weighting of benefits over suffering by the numbers on a chart with little thought to a person or persons being that number.


Barney

[sheltiedave]

Barney, you do realize that the coal ash contains greater amounts of dispersible radioactive material than nuclear plants generate, don't you?

[Pio1980]

We already know the pitfalls of the present system approaches already in service re nondisposable residue and system failures.
Let's inject some "safe" plausible nuclear power proposals into the discussion, anyone?

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[sheltiedave]

Pop, there is no perfect safe nuclear reactor design, and the liquid salt reactors, pebble bed reactors, and smaller inert gas cooled reactors all have an Achilles heel as well.

Our national electrical power grid is designed and engineered to supply power utilizing large, high density, constant power utility plants, and nuclear is the best in this regard.
Over the years, the NRC has succeeded in creating layer after layer of regulations so taxing that meeting all the regs represents over 70% of new plant costs, and close to 50% of operating costs.

There is all kinds of information about incidents, and bad plants. The real bad ones are legendary... The sticking pressure relief valve and lack of operator recognition that caused the TMI core meltdown. The same plant behavior at Davis Besse about 18 months prior had no incident because the operators, without totally recognizing the situation or root cause, still implemented the correct immediate action. The time the control room at Clinton plant in Illinois played "scram Sam", and reset the scram breaker in a controlled area by reaching into the area with a broomstick. The five year period where Millstone I and II did an emergency refuel every maintenance cycle, exceeding the allowed heat storage capacity of their spent fuel pools. Davis Bessie having a boron corroded reactor vessel head crdm steel layer less than 3/64" thick, not the as built 2" thickness. The coke can left in the bottom of the Detroit Fermi plant during construction, which caused a fuel channel failure when the plant was started up.

All these are quite well documented, in the public domain, and are available to read at the NRC.gov librar

[merrylander]

The Canadian Heavy Water CANDU reactor would never have the problems they had in Japan because when the power fails the control rods drop, shutting down the reactor Also it does not need to be shut down to re-fuel it India is planning (if they have not done it already) to run thr one they bought on Thorium.

That said all those labs built during the cold war were not power stations although Mound did design and build small power plants for satellites.

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by Oerets

Any sane intelligent person when looking at Nuclear see the dangers now. Going back to Curie the dangers were known. They lie and cover up to further their own interests, financial or personal. Same is still in practice today in just the use of nuclear and Xrays in the health industry. The use of fossil fuels and on and on, the weighting of benefits over suffering by the numbers on a chart with little thought to a person or persons being that number.


Barney

Barney they had the evidence of those Japanese fishermen on the Lucky Dragon who all took sick from the fallout of a nuclear test. It was not that they did not know, they just did not give a damn if some young women died.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by sheltiedave

Barney, you do realize that the coal ash contains greater amounts of dispersible radioactive material than nuclear plants generate, don't you?

This issue is far from clear cut but it's true that nuclear waste and coal fly ash are both highly radioactive and both present inherent health risks which are insupportable? That's why we need to get rid of both.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...nuclear-waste/

http://www.cejournal.net/?p=410

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Boreas

This issue is far from clear cut bit it's true that nuclear waste and coal fly ash are both highly radioactive and both present inherent health risks which are insupportable? That's why we need to get rid of both.

Yep, we need to rid ourselves of over 50% of our generation capacity tout de suite.