| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart
36804 Posts
|
|
 Posted -
14/11/2010
:
06:26
|
NEW VERSION TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR MEMBERS WITH SLOW CONNECTIONS TO CONNECT.
Follw this LINK for last version.
Stanley Challenger Graham
Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk
|
|
| Replies |
| Author |
|
|
Callunna
Revolving Grey Blob
3044 Posts
|
|
Posted - 15/03/2011 : 10:08
Someone wiser and more knowledgeable than most of us on this website once said:
"The unleashed power of the atom has changed everything except our modes of thinking and thus we drift towards unparalleled catastrophe."
That person was, of course, Albert Einstein.
=================== www.sheldrickrose.co.ukwww.bernulf.co.ukwww.bernulfsplace.co.uk  |
frankwilk
|
Posted - 15/03/2011 : 10:33
If we are looking at perspective . Wars since 1945 have been responsible for killing more people than Nuclear Power Plants have.
I like the Einstein quote the bugger made his name from Nuclear why didn't he stop when he realised how dangerous he though it could be.
Frank Wilkinson Once Navy Always Navy |
panbiker
|
Posted - 15/03/2011 : 11:42
Belle, there is no risk of a nuclear explosion at the stricken reactors in Japan. Yes there have been explosions but these have been caused by the ignition of hydrogen produced as a result of the fuel rods in the reactor losing cooling fluid and overheating. As long as the containment vessels remain intact there is little risk of contaminated material being released.
If the fuel rods cannot be kept cool the risk is that the rods will melt into the bottom of the containment vessel which may cause the vessel to rupture. This is what is known as the "China Syndrome" or nuclear meltdown. More hydrogen would be produced and further explosions from the plant in this state would release highly irrradiated material into the atmosphere. Obviously then everyone in the area is at the mercy of the prevailing winds and ongoing weather systems. I noticed that one news report yesterday did touch on this scenario and made the point that the prevailing winds would tend to take any discharge out into the Pacific. Of course material could be transported vast distances if they get into the upper atmosphere as was demonstrated by the Chernobyl disaster which contaminated most of Northern Europe including areas of the UK when the top of the containment vessel was blown off.
No risk of nuclear explosion but whichever way you look at it, it is very serious. I see the Japanese have asked for U.S. help to try and bring the situation under control. Tizer is right when he says that the plants themselves are not really at fault it is where they were built that is the issue.
I am no lover of nuclear power because we do not yet have the technology to fully control under all circumstances and decommission at the end of life. The only option we have is to bury in concrete which is considered acceptable by all operators of nuclear energy. Not really a solution.
Ian |
Callunna
Revolving Grey Blob
3044 Posts
|
|
Posted - 15/03/2011 : 11:54
quote:
panbiker wrote:
... we do not yet have the technology to fully control under all circumstances and decommission at the end of life. The only option we have is to bury in concrete which is considered acceptable by all operators of nuclear energy. Not really a solution.
"And if you tolerate this, then your children will be next"
Manic Street Preachers.
Song quote slightly out of context, but my point is that unless we can be 100% certain nuclear waste and catastrophic accidents can be safely eliminated, then what kind of legacy are we leaving our children/grandchildren/g-grandchildren?
The events in Japan should be sending a clear message to all those who advocate nuclear energy. Whether they will consider the long term future or the short term benefits is another thing. We won't be around to hear what our descendents think of our handling of the subject.
=================== www.sheldrickrose.co.ukwww.bernulf.co.ukwww.bernulfsplace.co.uk |
Bodger
|
Posted - 15/03/2011 : 13:11
Over 3.000 people are killed every day in car crashes, yet i do'nt hear anyone calling for the shutting down of oil wells, in fact wars are being fought for the right to run wells, thus killing more people. Tizer may be able to confirm that in the distant past there were natural nuclear reactors on earth, and yet as a life form we evolved from their debris, so why all the panic, the quoted number of possible deaths, 10,000 are from a natural cause not man made
"You can only make as well as you can measure"
Joseph Whitworth
|
panbiker
|
Posted - 15/03/2011 : 13:47
quote:
Bodger wrote:
the quoted number of possible deaths, 10,000 are from a natural cause not man madeThat remains to be seen. It will be a number of months before the final death toll will be known and many years for the knock on effects of a radiation spill if that is what happens.
Ian |
Bruff
|
Posted - 15/03/2011 : 14:20
''......unless we can be 100% certain nuclear waste and catastrophic accidents can be safely eliminated.....''
You can never be this certain for this industry, or for any other industry, or indeed for any facet of your life. Zero risk does not exist. Even if you took to your bed in a valiant attempt to avoid all hazards and associated risk, you'd be at serious risk of depression.
The debate around nuclear power is largely not one of 'risk'. Rather it is, in the main, one of public perceptions. One reason for this is that it it is a 'dreaded' risk, one of a number of 'risk attributes', which includes whether a risk is undertaken voluntarily, whether it affects the vulnerable (the young or the old for example), whether the risk affects this, or future, generations and associated costs burdens now or in the future, whether the realisation of the risk manifests as multiple or a drip-drip of fatalities and so on and so on. All risks have attributes, and this mix of attributes informs public perceptions and therefore debate. It is also worth noting that these attributes can cause the media to amplify (or attenuate) the risk - deaths in car crashes tend to make the local press; a train crash killing one or two will guarantee blanket national coverage. But typically, at least six folk will die today on the roads in this country, as they did yesterday, and will do tomorrow, and on Thursday.
So it serves little purpose if the debate is formed around assessments to demonstrate with 100% certainty the safety of any activity (and anyway, a quantified risk assessment will only get you so far due to the attributes and perceptions noted). Rather the debate is about what society is willing to tolerate for the benefits that come from undertaking the risky activity, the perceptions that inform this tolerability, and the trade-offs in making the judgement.
Because all activity has with it an inherent risk.
Richard Broughton
|
belle
|
Posted - 15/03/2011 : 14:31
Japan is already admitting there has been a greater radiation leak than first reported....I was not questioning Tizer so as to have a debate on the rights and wrongs of Nuclear fuel or the moral questions behind splitting the atom, i just wanted to know , if the nuclear reactors in Japan disgorge their contents into the atmosphere or the sea or wherever, would this really kill less people than a one off tsunami?
Life is what you make it |
panbiker
|
Posted - 15/03/2011 : 14:55
It is difficult to say what the ongoing effects of a nuclear discharge would be there are a lot of variables as Richard says with regard to risk assesment. Historicaly there have been a number of incidents that could be used as guides to what could be one scenario. The World Health Organisation published it's predictions on the long term effects of Chernobyl 20 years after the event in 2005, click the link to see the report.
They estimate that up to 4,000 people will die as a direct result of that particular disaster.
It does really depend on how fast they can get on top of the problem and the direction that the winds blow. Once the atmosphere is contaminated there is not a lot you can do about it, I know that if I lived in Korea or southern China notwithstanding the rest of Japan, I would be a little more than worried with the current state of affairs.
Edited by - panbiker on 15/03/2011 14:58:36
Ian |
panbiker
|
Posted - 15/03/2011 : 16:15
Can I post in here? I have posted in the Arcade topic about the system not updating my scores in various games. The topic does not appear in the list of latest topics on the homepage even though I can see my post within the topic.
Yes I can and I can edit, very curious!
Edited by - panbiker on 15/03/2011 16:17:39
I have tried clearing my cookies but it makes no difference
Edited by - panbiker on 15/03/2011 16:31:14
Ian |
catgate
|
Posted - 15/03/2011 : 16:34
I was attracted by the following article :-
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/03/why-adulterous-failed-banker-sir-fred-goodwins-workplace-affair-and-his-attempt-to-conceal-it-with-a-gagging-order-are-matters-of-public-interest.html
After I read through it I realised, once again, that as long as our politicians are under the control of these people there is no hope of a proper and fair system of goverment, no matter how it is disguised by smoke and mirrors.
Edit :- How many of the risks that are forced upon the populations of the world are attributable to the "needs" of such people?
Edited by - catgate on 15/03/2011 4:39:03 PM
Every silver lining has a cloud.
|
frankwilk
|
Posted - 15/03/2011 : 16:34
Richard
I agree100% with your insight into Risk and the Perception associated with it. In my opinion an excellent post thanks for the clarity, well for me anyway.
Frank Wilkinson Once Navy Always Navy |
Callunna
Revolving Grey Blob
3044 Posts
|
|
Posted - 15/03/2011 : 17:09
quote:
panbiker wrote:
Can I post in here? I have posted in the Arcade topic about the system not updating my scores in various games. The topic does not appear in the list of latest topics on the homepage even though I can see my post within the topic.
Yes I can and I can edit, very curious!
Edited by - panbiker on 15/03/2011 16:17:39
I have tried clearing my cookies but it makes no difference
Edited by - panbiker on 15/03/2011 16:31:14Having the same trouble with some of the games. Battletank Thingy won't even let me start let alone move or shoot.
=================== www.sheldrickrose.co.ukwww.bernulf.co.ukwww.bernulfsplace.co.uk |
Tizer
|
Posted - 15/03/2011 : 20:12
Belle, sorry to take so long to reply to your question. The general points about safety of nuclear power have been made much more eloquently than I could ever do by OG members above. Let me address your specific point about what I called a tsunami from hydroelectric installations. I was referring to the unleashing of a large amount of water from the dam serving an HE plant. The Chinese have built many enormous dams, much bigger than any we have here and they are on seriously big rivers like the Yangtze and Yellow rivers. If one of these dams fails the water will rush all the way down the river valley and flood plain to the sea. These are long rivers, the Yangtze is 3rd longest in the world at 4,000 miles running from the mountains of Tibet to the sea at Shanghai. The Yellow river is 6th longest in the world at 3,400 miles, flowing across nine provinces of China.
The Three Gorges Dam on the Yangtze is the largest in the world and when full its reservoir is over 400 miles long and holds about 40,000,000,000 cubic metres of water. There is a second large dam and more being built on the river. The Yellow river has 14 dams for HE power. Wikipedia lists 31 major cities lying on the Yangtze river and 8 on the Yellow river. You can see how the failure of even one of these big dams would drown millions of people in the cities and countryside between the dam and the sea. The vast amount of water will clear everything in its path, including dams lower down the valley, and through cities and on to the next cities and even when it begins to spread out on the plains the water will flood the countryside over major areas of China.
|
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart
36804 Posts
|
|
Posted - 16/03/2011 : 06:03
Splendid post Richard and Ian does well to point out the WHO report on Chernobyl. There was a good Horizon programme a couple of years ago which made the same point about the gap between perceptions and what actually happened. The only certainty is that the genie is out of the bottle and having accepted the benefits, we have to live with it. I can remember worrying about Atomic Bombs fifty years ago. A rough estimate of deaths in mines, not including accidents and collateral deaths in general population which would push the estimate far higher, was 50,000 between 1800 and 1950. If death toll was the criterion Bodge is right, we'd shut almost everything down!
Belle, Tiz makes a good point about the great dams in China, there is such a high concentration of population in the valleys below them.
I had my own melt-down this morning. Popped a cold pot of tea in the microwave on a 3 minute high burn, took Jack out for a pee and came in to a kitchen full of smoke and flames in the microwave. It wouldn't turn off so plug ripped out and windows opened upstairs and down. Very refreshing sat here in tee shirt with a nice breeze clearing the smoke away! No damage thankfully and the offending 15 year old appliance is sat in the back yard with the plug cut off it. I shall get a new one this morning.
So, do I ban microwaves or electricity in the house? Of course I don't. I accept the risk, apply the technology sensibly and and carry on normally. Smaller scale but same dilemma and in the end the same solution.
Stanley Challenger Graham
Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk |
WHAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION TODAY? (NEW)
