Forum Thread

Is nuclear power safe?

dollarbill 2,392 554 March 12, 2011 at 02:05 AM
With all the radiation being released by the Japanese power plants . I thought I'd ask the question again. Considering we have Nukes built right on fault lines and in coastal areas here in the US .Here's a vid of the Fukushima reactor exploding
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1...r_embedded

693 Comments

1 2 3 4 5

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Jan 2004
Your mama's lover
7,990 Posts
153 Reputation
#16
Considering you don't think about all the toxins you breath in from the burning of coal and oil, yes, it has its intrinsic risks but emphysema, bronichitis, and other pulmonary diseases weren't nearly as prevalent before the Industrial Revolution. We don't think twice about the pollutants and their effects on our health and lifespan because we are integrated into a society already polluted with those factors. Hence it is easy to make nuclear power sound like the big bad wolf because society isn't integrated with the idea. How many people died from the leak at Three Mile Island? None! How many people have developed cancers and health related issues from coal and oil? Millions?!? I will be slightly off but I remember hearing that nuclear power is 99.985% efficient while burning coal is 45-55%. So which is giving up the greater waste? It is just how we don't think twice about the 30,000-50,000 killed in a car accident but a terrorist kills half a dozen people, we are ready to surrender all of our rights and privledges. We fear what we don't understand and we put less riskier entities on a pedestal because they are foreign to us.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
nil carborundum illegitimi
Translation: Don't let the bastard grind you down!
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Oct 2009
Permanent Ban
5,565 Posts
92 Reputation
#17
Quote from Hurricane View Post :
Considering you don't think about all the toxins you breath in from the burning of coal and oil, yes, it has its intrinsic risks but emphysema, bronichitis, and other pulmonary diseases weren't nearly as prevalent before the Industrial Revolution. We don't think twice about the pollutants and their effects on our health and lifespan because we are integrated into a society already polluted with those factors. Hence it is easy to make nuclear power sound like the big bad wolf because society isn't integrated with the idea. How many people died from the leak at Three Mile Island? None! How many people have developed cancers and health related issues from coal and oil? Millions?!? I will be slightly off but I remember hearing that nuclear power is 99.985% efficient while burning coal is 45-55%. So which is giving up the greater waste? It is just how we don't think twice about the 30,000-50,000 killed in a car accident but a terrorist kills half a dozen people, we are ready to surrender all of our rights and privledges. We fear what we don't understand and we put less riskier entities on a pedestal because they are foreign to us.
for once i'm surprised at such a reasonable statement Faint
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Jan 2004
Your mama's lover
7,990 Posts
153 Reputation
#18
Quote from Ryu-bom View Post :
Well on the bright side, Japanese can gets a free body scan courtesy ....nod

TSA and Homeland Security must be so wet at such a idea..


No nuclear is NOT safe....

Unless you can prepare for the unpredictable, how can it be safe...

Today was the unpredictable and look how well that turned out....

Safe is a opinion to be taken highly lightly by the nuclear thumpers.... Obviously they can build a nuclear plant but yet can't even have tech to predict when a earthquake is coming...Wink

Well maybe if the 2nd and 3rd core fail, Godzilla will wake up and come to soak up all the released fallout.. ( as seen in a Godzilla movie )Wink
100's to 1000's were killed in trains. Should they not allow trains to run for fear of an earthquake or the waves that result? I can guarantee that more will die just from one of the several trains that were hit than die of radiation poison. Heck, most likely, the lone person swept out to sea in California will result in great loss of life than those affected by the nuclear plant (I heard today that basically anyone in the vicinity will get the amount of radiation that most Japanese would get in one year)...maybe we should ban people from the coastline?!?

So to make nuclear power the boggie man by the media is intellectually dishonest!
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Nov 2005
L10: Grand Master
9,266 Posts
815 Reputation
#19
World watches nervously as Japan struggles with nuclear reactors [cnn.com]

Quote :
The explosion was caused, he said, by a failure in a pumping system as workers tried to prevent the reactor's temperature from racing out of control.
Quote :
"If this accident stops right now it will already be one of the three worst accidents we have ever had at a nuclear power plant in the history of nuclear power," said Joseph Cirincione, an expert on nuclear materials and president of the U.S.-based Ploughshares Fund, a firm involved in security and peace funding.

If the effort to cool the nuclear fuel inside the reactor fails completely -- a scenario experts who have spoken to CNN say is unlikely -- the resulting release of radiation could cause enormous damage to the plant or release radiation into the atmosphere or water. That could lead to widespread cancer and other health problems, experts say.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Oct 2009
Permanent Ban
5,565 Posts
92 Reputation
#20
Quote from Hurricane View Post :
100's to 1000's were killed in trains. Should they not allow trains to run for fear of an earthquake or the waves that result? I can guarantee that more will die just from one of the several trains that were hit than die of radiation poison. Heck, most likely, the lone person swept out to sea in California will result in great loss of life than those affected by the nuclear plant (I heard today that basically anyone in the vicinity will get the amount of radiation that most Japanese would get in one year)...maybe we should ban people from the coastline?!?

So to make nuclear power the boggie man by the media is intellectually dishonest!
No one said it was a boggie man...

Just if the plant BLOWS up, would you like to live close to there...

Dealing with fallout and nuclear waste is very time-consuming and cost billions... Chernobyl can break a country economically, and if it wasn't for international help that place will still be leaking today..

Basic consumption limits and increase renewables would do us better in the long run... Cheap energy just promotes more waste and less innovations..

Point is someone was asleep at the wheel, Japan is not Hati, and they missed the big one... so what does that tell you...?

I certainly wouldn't want to live next to power plant like that in one of the earthquake regions of the world.. would you?

Also do you think if the plant blows and all that stuff is released into the air and atmosphere up in Japan its only going to suck for the japanese? Its going to affect part of the world
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Last edited by Ryu-bom March 12, 2011 at 10:01 AM.
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Jan 2004
Your mama's lover
7,990 Posts
153 Reputation
#21
Quote from Ryu-bom View Post :
for once i'm surprised at such a reasonable statement Faint
You shouldn't. Most of my arguements tend to focus on the big picture not the instant gratification or the headline talking point. For instance, I am against abortion, but understand for a lot of teens and their family life, it is a needed evil. Also, while so many were quick to bash Bush on spending, they sit quiet on Obama. I blame both and don't play the political bullshit of putting my blame where my political leanings point. I personally don't own a gun because of personal reasons but am a diehard supporter of the Second Amendment. I think the Westboro Baptist people who protests military funerals are assholes and I wouldn't shed a tear if someone drove their car through them, but I am glad the SCOTUS ruled for them because of the need to protect all speech. I hope the father of the kid who was kidnapped by a rapist/cannibal who may get released soon does get his revenge because their is no reason that such a person should ever be released from jail and is likely to recommit another offense, so I applaud anyone that removes a cancer from society. I am glad Wisconsin took away the powers of the unions because all they did was took more taxpayer money to pay off politicians. Now maybe some businesses will start returning to Wisconisin or leaving Illinois which is going in the other direction. Sorry, but in almost all of my arguements, I always examine the big picture. In the few instance I don't, I will give my reason why I deviate from the norms but understand why others may overwelmingly disagree.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Jan 2004
Your mama's lover
7,990 Posts
153 Reputation
#22
Quote from Ryu-bom View Post :
No one said it was a boggie man...

Just if the plant BLOWS up, would you like to live close to there...

Dealing with fallout and nuclear waste is very time-consuming and cost billions... Chernobyl can break a country economically, and if it wasn't for international help that place will still be leaking today..

Basic consumption limits and increase renewables would do us better in the long run... Cheap energy just promotes more waste and less innovations..

Point is someone was asleep at the wheel, Japan is not Hati, and they missed the big one... so what does that tell you...?

I certainly wouldn't want to live next to power plant like that in one of the earthquake regions of the world.. would you?

Also do you think if the plant blows and all that stuff is released into the air and atmosphere up in Japan its only going to suck for the japanese? Its going to affect part of the world
How is it any difference from the people who live near a fault line on west coast, the people on the east coast who live through hurricanes, the people in the midwest who live in tornado alley, or the people who live in the flood plains along the river? The fact is, life has inherent risk. If you don't like it, go live in Montana...except you may have the Winter of the Century. Damn....looks like there is nowhere safe to live. How the hell will society function?!? I guarantee whereever you live Ryu-bom, there are risks that exist more predominately than other places...so why do you live there? I wouldn't want to live by a nuclear plant, coal plant or oil refinery, but I also don't want to pay $5 gas. I wouldn't want to live in Chicago where there is a murder a day. I wouldn't want to live along the Mississippi or Missouri rivers which have flooded many communities. I wouldn't want to live in the Northeast which gets paralyzed by snow and is considered to have the worst drivers based on accidents per capita. I wouldn't want to live along the San Andreas fault. As you see, the situation for risks occurs literally everywhere. Once again, Three Mile Island had a meltdown, the media played it up at the time as the worse thing ever, and most people couldn't tell you this little known fact: Not one person died as a result of Three Mile Island. And from what is being reported on the radiation level in Japan, no one will probably die of radiation exposure to that. Meanwhile, 100's will die in this country in a car accident. Several will die striking a deer. 1000's will see a doctor due to pulmonary health issues as a result of breathing in the by-products of coal and oil. I am sorry if I can't freak out over something which sounds dramatic at a nuclear plant, but will probably have a neglible effect on Japanese citizens. But it sure sounds scary to talk about the worst case probability rather that the most likely probability. Hence most people will focus on the former because they lack the intellectual capacity to understand that the later is infinitely more likely.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Jul 2007
L10: Grand Master
16,929 Posts
1,005 Reputation
#23
Everybody dies from something. That doesn't mean it's ok to harm people.

We spend billions to make cars safer and to make coal-fired plants cleaner, despite efforts from a certain industry-funded political party to eliminate environmental protections. But these efforts work.

Nuclear power simply isn't the solution for our electrical needs, because there's no way that local residents will allow enough construction. It's no longer worth considering. Japan will also stop new plant construction and they will develop alternatives.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Aug 2003
L∞: The Doctor
3,287 Posts
150 Reputation
#24


Fear always trumps truth in our media.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
#25
Quote from Rebound View Post :
Everybody dies from something. That doesn't mean it's ok to harm people.

We spend billions to make cars safer and to make coal-fired plants cleaner, despite efforts from a certain industry-funded political party to eliminate environmental protections. But these efforts work.

Nuclear power simply isn't the solution for our electrical needs, because there's no way that local residents will allow enough construction. It's no longer worth considering. Japan will also stop new plant construction and they will develop alternatives.

What do you think is the solution for our electrical needs?
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Mar 2007
L10: Grand Master
7,542 Posts
448 Reputation
#26
Newer reactors are safer.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Apr 2007
L10: Grand Master
7,491 Posts
251 Reputation
#27
14 people killed in a NYC tour bus accident [yahoo.com]...let's ban tour buses because they are unsafe.
19 killed in a coal mine blast [foxnews.com]...let's ban coal mines too.

sadly, as others have stated, people in the media and (generally) on the left with a blind anvirowacko / anti-nuke agenda don't care about facts...just sensationalist headlines and claims to further their own warped logic.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Last edited by Radeck March 12, 2011 at 12:08 PM.
Whee Argue Soap Box

"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

"The federal government has taken too much tax money from the people, too much authority from the States, and too much liberty with the Constitution" - Ronald Reagan
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Dec 2010
L6: Expert
1,374 Posts
92 Reputation
#28
Who promised anyone safety?

Life is a risk.

Wear a cup.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Sep 2007
L10: Grand Master
24,044 Posts
2,237 Reputation
#29
Quote from Rebound View Post :
Everybody dies from something. That doesn't mean it's ok to harm people.

We spend billions to make cars safer and to make coal-fired plants cleaner, despite efforts from a certain industry-funded political party to eliminate environmental protections. But these efforts work.

Nuclear power simply isn't the solution for our electrical needs, because there's no way that local residents will allow enough construction. It's no longer worth considering. Japan will also stop new plant construction and they will develop alternatives.
yeah right, what other option is japan going to go towards?
Buy its energy from Russia?
They'll rebuild and continue with Nuclear power because frankly there's no alternative for Japan.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Apr 2007
L10: Grand Master
7,491 Posts
251 Reputation
#30
Quote from azianai View Post :
yeah right, what other option is japan going to go towards?
Buy its energy from Russia?
They'll rebuild and continue with Nuclear power because frankly there's no alternative for Japan.
correct...they temporarily asked Russia to increase the energy it sends to Japan, but they cant let themselves be held hostage to Russia as the Europeans have done, whereby every spat between Russia and Ukraine results in the cutting off of gas pipelines...it's just not feasible...the other option is to be held hostage to the middle east or other fossil fuel producers as they have nothing...

they have no other options

One solution for them (as well as the USA to deal with the envirowackos) is to setup nuke plants on off-shore platforms much like oil drillers and the experimentation now going on with offshore windmills....i don't know how feasible they would be, and certainly would be expensive, and have to be built extra sturdy to deal with typhoons/hurricanes and other weather conditions...those with pylons sitting on the seabed would have to deal with earthquakes, whereas floating platforms would avoid that, but be more expensive, but have the option to sever power cables and be moved out of harms way as a last resort in case of very bad weather, or a radiation leak / accident...
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Page 2 of 47
1 2 3 4 5
Join the Conversation
Add a Comment
 
Copyright 1999 - 2017. Slickdeals, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Copyright / Infringement Policy  •  Privacy Policy  •  Terms of Service  •  Acceptable Use Policy (Rules)  •  Interest-Based Ads
Link Copied to Clipboard