Nuc Plants on the war path!! - Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest

Go Back   Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat
GL4x4 Live! GL4x4 Casino

Politics, Government, or Religion Chat Bring your flamesuit!

greatlakes4x4.com is the premier Great Lakes 4x4 Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Search
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old March 15th, 2011, 09:01 PM   #1
Chiefwoohaw
Pokerob is my B*tch!
 
Chiefwoohaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-06-05
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 11,507
iTrader: (7)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default Nuc Plants on the war path!!

Yeah, cause our plants are going to see huge 30ft waves crashing into them so it's totally relevent . . right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyNutJobLady
"If a plant was operating for a certain period of time, what assurances do we have that it's mechanically sound," said Ira Helfand, a board member at Physicians for Social Responsibility. "Given what's happened in Japan, do we really want nuclear plants operating here?"

http://money.cnn.com/2011/03/15/news...dex.htm?hpt=T2

Last edited by Chiefwoohaw; March 16th, 2011 at 10:33 AM.
Chiefwoohaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old March 16th, 2011, 12:49 PM   #2
L4CX
Out for the Summer!
 
L4CX's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-16-07
Location: Hillsdale, MI
Posts: 4,947
iTrader: (5)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chiefwoohaw View Post
Yeah, cause our plants are going to see huge 30ft waves crashing into them so it's totally relevent . . right?




http://money.cnn.com/2011/03/15/news...dex.htm?hpt=T2
I would think one word would answer that question. Inspections. I would bet they have to go through a ton of inspections on a regular basis. I would also suggest we build newer, more efficient, ones so that we could retire the old ones if he's really all that worried.
L4CX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2011, 01:34 PM   #3
JohnnyJ
Low Range Drifter
 
JohnnyJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-09-05
Location: Hartland, MI
Posts: 6,233
iTrader: (38)
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Default

The thing that keeps going through my mind is that all I hear are news snippets talking about radiation levels being above limits. But no real information.

So what are the limits? What are the ill effects? Not in an irrational make news way, but let's say compared to what I get having my teeth x-rayed at the dentist every year.

I'm guessing that like many other industries, they have a safety threshold that are way lower than what can cause harm. How much safety buffer is there before it becomes harmful?

I'm not trying to imply its good, but before I run around in circles like my hair is on fire because of a report on CNN, MSNBC, or Fox; I'd like a bit of background info.

How are the radiation levels compared to say 3-mile Island or Chernobyl?
__________________
Neither Skinny Nor Pretty DEAK Racing 4517 Ultra 4 Mod Class Rig
Surviving Project Car Hell - We have all been there
JohnnyJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2011, 01:52 PM   #4
aber61
Senior Member
 
aber61's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-22-08
Location: Commerce Twp. Michigan
Posts: 6,092
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyJ View Post
The thing that keeps going through my mind is that all I hear are news snippets talking about radiation levels being above limits. But no real information.

So what are the limits? What are the ill effects? Not in an irrational make news way, but let's say compared to what I get having my teeth x-rayed at the dentist every year.

I'm guessing that like many other industries, they have a safety threshold that are way lower than what can cause harm. How much safety buffer is there before it becomes harmful?

I'm not trying to imply its good, but before I run around in circles like my hair is on fire because of a report on CNN, MSNBC, or Fox; I'd like a bit of background info.

How are the radiation levels compared to say 3-mile Island or Chernobyl?
From what I heard on the news is, Chernobyl did not have the reactor contained and were cooling it with a flammable substance called graphite and not water/coolent.
People died at Chernobyl and none in Japan and none at 3mileisland.
If you do need more info then you will need to attend first hand classes held at nuclear plant in japan or do a google search or ask duffman, he's a smart dude.
Take your pick
aber61 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2011, 01:52 PM   #5
whiterhino
I'm not old, honest...
 
whiterhino's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-07-06
Location: Davisburg MI
Posts: 21,339
iTrader: (21)
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Default

paging duffman

I did hear this morning that Chernobyl was a totally different and outdated design.
__________________
GLFWDA member since 1979.
Member Southern Michigan Rock Crawlers.
whiterhino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2011, 02:33 PM   #6
tw1st3d5
Senior Member
 
tw1st3d5's Avatar
 
Join Date: 10-12-09
Location: Berrien Springs, MI
Posts: 1,008
iTrader: (16)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyJ View Post
The thing that keeps going through my mind is that all I hear are news snippets talking about radiation levels being above limits. But no real information.

So what are the limits? What are the ill effects? Not in an irrational make news way, but let's say compared to what I get having my teeth x-rayed at the dentist every year.

I'm guessing that like many other industries, they have a safety threshold that are way lower than what can cause harm. How much safety buffer is there before it becomes harmful?

I'm not trying to imply its good, but before I run around in circles like my hair is on fire because of a report on CNN, MSNBC, or Fox; I'd like a bit of background info.

How are the radiation levels compared to say 3-mile Island or Chernobyl?
The limits in the states are MUCH lower then would cause harm. Our Total Effective Dose Equivalent is 5 Rem. That would be equivalent to .05 Sievert which is the measurement you are hearing from Japan. This is all public information on the NRC website. HERE

There are other different dose limits based on what type of radiation it is; beta, gamma, neutron, etc; and where the exposure is on the body. Now as far as doses causing problems...


Type Biological Response
Blood --Doses as low as 50 rad can affect the white cell population within 15 minutes. Red cell counts fall 2 to 3 weeks later. Results in a feeling of general weakness, anemia, and a lower resistance to infection.

Reproductive Organs -- Exposures below 100 rad can reduce fertility.

Digestive Organs -- Degenerative changes occur as soon as 30 minutes after exposure of 500-1000 rad. Initial effects are: impaired secretion of necessary fluids: cell breakdown results in failure of food and water absorption leading to infection and dehydration from diarrhea.

Vascular System -- Sensitivity varies for the vascular system. Damage is great only in the 600-1500 rad range. This damage by radiation contributes to some of the heart, changes in other tissues.

Skin -- Exposures between 500-1000 rad can produce skin changes. However, as little as 100 rad can cause cell death in the germinal layer.

Bone and Teeth -- Some parts of bone can be damaged by 700-1500 rad. Regeneration can begin 2 to 6 weeks after exposure.

Respiratory System -- Inflammation of the lungs can occur at 1000-2000 rad. Possible hemorrhaging due to changes produced in blood vessels.

Urinary System -- Secondary effects can show up years after exposure in the 500-2000 rad range due to changes in blood vessels.

Muscle and Connective Tissues -- Massive exposures (over 2000 rad) are needed to cause slight changes in these tissues.

Nervous Tissue -- Massive exposures are required (over 3000 rad) to bring about morphological changes in these tissues.

And I know you are asking, What is a Rad? Well 1 Rad = 1 Rem.
tw1st3d5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2011, 05:31 PM   #7
DuffMan
Your Message Here
 
DuffMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: The Ile of Grosse
Posts: 5,837
iTrader: (11)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Chernobyl was a completely different story.

No containment and a dry graphite moderated, gas-cooled reactor. Few backup systems and no real "defense in depth". On top of that, Chernobyl staff was doing an experiment at the time to see how low a power setting they could reach in the reactor. To accomplish this experiment, they had to disable most of their safety systems. So when the reactor got unstable and power spiked, there was nothing to stop it. Kapow.

The explosion tore the core open, and made it so they couldn't control the reaction (graphite moderator blown to hell) and couldn't cool it (gas cooling - not liquid).

Dose rates were lethal and contamination was everywhere because the reactor was open to the outside while having some level of criticality.

Three Mile Island - now stay with me here - was a success for the U.S. nuclear program. In short, the operators did almost everything wrong and didn't notice that the reactor was losing coolant level until fuel was damaged and they had a couple small H explosions.
The plant did it'ss job and contained everything. Other than some really minor some noble gas and I gas releases (with half-lives measured in minutes) , there was no release to environment. Really. Every anti-nuke group there is has tried to find evidence of a release and failed.

The issue with the Japanese plants is two dry spent fuel pools at units where the reactors were already unloaded. Dry fuel can get damaged and release Iodines and Cs-137 to the environment. They just need to keep it cool enough to prevent damage, and the contamination will remain local. There's spent fuel stored outdoors in dry casks here in MI.

It'll be a mess there, but (unless they really screw the pooch) it'll be limited to the immediate vicinity, meaning no discernible risk to the U.S.
__________________
This is the Pub. Leave common sense at the door.
DuffMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2011, 05:36 PM   #8
DuffMan
Your Message Here
 
DuffMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: The Ile of Grosse
Posts: 5,837
iTrader: (11)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tw1st3d5 View Post
The limits in the states are MUCH lower then would cause harm. Our Total Effective Dose Equivalent is 5 Rem. That would be equivalent to .05 Sievert which is the measurement you are hearing from Japan. This is all public information on the NRC website. HERE

There are other different dose limits based on what type of radiation it is; beta, gamma, neutron, etc; and where the exposure is on the body. Now as far as doses causing problems...


Type Biological Response
Blood --Doses as low as 50 rad can affect the white cell population within 15 minutes. Red cell counts fall 2 to 3 weeks later. Results in a feeling of general weakness, anemia, and a lower resistance to infection.

Reproductive Organs -- Exposures below 100 rad can reduce fertility.

Digestive Organs -- Degenerative changes occur as soon as 30 minutes after exposure of 500-1000 rad. Initial effects are: impaired secretion of necessary fluids: cell breakdown results in failure of food and water absorption leading to infection and dehydration from diarrhea.

Vascular System -- Sensitivity varies for the vascular system. Damage is great only in the 600-1500 rad range. This damage by radiation contributes to some of the heart, changes in other tissues.

Skin -- Exposures between 500-1000 rad can produce skin changes. However, as little as 100 rad can cause cell death in the germinal layer.

Bone and Teeth -- Some parts of bone can be damaged by 700-1500 rad. Regeneration can begin 2 to 6 weeks after exposure.

Respiratory System -- Inflammation of the lungs can occur at 1000-2000 rad. Possible hemorrhaging due to changes produced in blood vessels.

Urinary System -- Secondary effects can show up years after exposure in the 500-2000 rad range due to changes in blood vessels.

Muscle and Connective Tissues -- Massive exposures (over 2000 rad) are needed to cause slight changes in these tissues.

Nervous Tissue -- Massive exposures are required (over 3000 rad) to bring about morphological changes in these tissues.

And I know you are asking, What is a Rad? Well 1 Rad = 1 Rem.
x2.

Like cigarette smoke or asbestos, the risk from radiation generally isn't from the one-time exposure (even a reasonably large one) - it's from a little bit, repeated day after day for years.

250 REM is considered "LD50-30" dose, meaning that it's a lethal dose within 30 days for 50% of those who receive it. As stated, a U.S. worker can get 5 REM a year - most radworkers get far less.
__________________
This is the Pub. Leave common sense at the door.
DuffMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2011, 06:17 PM   #9
bigblockford79
Big Block Ranger
 
bigblockford79's Avatar
 
Join Date: 05-11-08
Location: Hamilton, MI
Posts: 2,741
iTrader: (24)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

All this talk of nuclear power plants doesn't scare me much, it really peaks my interest. I live a short drive from the Palisades plant in South Haven, and because of all this fear mongering I REALLY want to tour the place to see what it is all about. Its a fascinating (albeit dangerous) form of power creation that is basically a necessary evil at this time. Without the Nuc plants we have in MI our price per Kw/h would be much higher.
__________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it while pooping, thank Bill Gates!

"A girls butt hole is like a 9 volt battery. You know its wrong, but eventually you put your tongue on it."
bigblockford79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2011, 06:31 PM   #10
alterego
Senior Member
 
alterego's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-05-11
Location: Ionia County / Michigan
Posts: 199
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigblockford79 View Post
All this talk of nuclear power plants doesn't scare me much, it really peaks my interest. I live a short drive from the Palisades plant in South Haven, and because of all this fear mongering I REALLY want to tour the place to see what it is all about. Its a fascinating (albeit dangerous) form of power creation that is basically a necessary evil at this time. Without the Nuc plants we have in MI our price per Kw/h would be much higher.
No one has died from a nucular plant in the entire history of the technology of producing electricity or operating reactors for ships propulsion etc, except for Chernoble, which had no containment and was being operated by idiots.

More people die every year in coal minds or at refineries than has ever occured at nuclear reactors.

So to say that it is a dangerous method for creating power is an untrue statement. If you are using all other forms of power as a comparison.
alterego is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2011, 06:39 PM   #11
Brods
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 01-21-07
Location: Salem, Mi
Posts: 704
iTrader: (2)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Can someone explain why with all the remote control technology there is no vehicle, machine, blimp or copter that could be utilized via remote control to dump water or drag a hose over the top of the #4 reactor building? Some company in japan must have a blimp, strap fire hoses to it and have at it.

And what is the difficulty getting power to the cooling pumps? What size pumps are we talking about? There have got to be back up pumps, how many are there? Is there no valving that would allow hooking up to the cooling loop and bypassing the dead pumps (like with engine powered pumps or fire truck pumpers)? How are they doing it now? Seems they should be air lifting pumps, gensets, fire trucks, etc and throwing everything they got at it. Wtf?
Brods is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2011, 06:41 PM   #12
Brods
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 01-21-07
Location: Salem, Mi
Posts: 704
iTrader: (2)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alterego View Post
No one has died from a nucular plant in the entire history of the technology of producing electricity or operating reactors for ships propulsion etc, except for Chernoble, which had no containment and was being operated by idiots.

More people die every year in coal minds or at refineries than has ever occured at nuclear reactors.

So to say that it is a dangerous method for creating power is an untrue statement. If you are using all other forms of power as a comparison.
So if you are using coal mines as an example, you are implying no one has ever died from mining uranium or from the enrichment process?
Brods is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2011, 06:46 PM   #13
steveo
In the band!
 
Join Date: 03-30-07
Location: montana/wyoming
Posts: 20,293
iTrader: (6)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brods View Post
Can someone explain why with all the remote control technology there is no vehicle, machine, blimp or copter that could be utilized via remote control to dump water or drag a hose over the top of the #4 reactor building? Some company in japan must have a blimp, strap fire hoses to it and have at it.

And what is the difficulty getting power to the cooling pumps? What size pumps are we talking about? There have got to be back up pumps, how many are there? Is there no valving that would allow hooking up to the cooling loop and bypassing the dead pumps (like with engine powered pumps or fire truck pumpers)? How are they doing it now? Seems they should be air lifting pumps, gensets, fire trucks, etc and throwing everything they got at it. Wtf?
http://matdl.org/failurecases/Other%...res/Willow.htm

51 dead.
steveo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2011, 06:47 PM   #14
steveo
In the band!
 
Join Date: 03-30-07
Location: montana/wyoming
Posts: 20,293
iTrader: (6)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

so now people are scared of nuclear power? same shit different decade, ever hear of 3 mile island? that accident alone almost killed our nuclear power initiative.
steveo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2011, 06:51 PM   #15
dougstephvoor
Supreme Chancelor!
 
dougstephvoor's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-21-10
Location: Saranac/Michigan
Posts: 2,212
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brods View Post
So if you are using coal mines as an example, you are implying no one has ever died from mining uranium or from the enrichment process?
Well ya know what, I am not going to make statements about mining uranium.

As I do not know.

Please tell us statistics of uranium and plutonium mines?

I understand their to be a method of producing power using pellets of material in stead of a core, which drastically minimizes the chance of having a melt down as their is a limiteed amount of fuel, however we need to have a location to discard the used fuel, I.E. Yucka mountain. No one wants to allow the Yucka site to proceed.

So with that type of thing happening on all fronts, coal fired power, natural gas, nuclear, biofuel, conventional fuel, every one wants to say not in my back yard, it is not safe.

Please tell me what form of fuel we should use to produce enough energy to keep the advancement of society moving forward, magic fairy dust?
dougstephvoor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2011, 06:57 PM   #16
steveo
In the band!
 
Join Date: 03-30-07
Location: montana/wyoming
Posts: 20,293
iTrader: (6)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Depleted uranium makes great bullets.
steveo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2011, 07:08 PM   #17
Brods
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 01-21-07
Location: Salem, Mi
Posts: 704
iTrader: (2)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by steveo View Post
What does a construction failure while building a cooling tower have to do with anything?

Quote:
Originally Posted by dougstephvoor View Post
Well ya know what, I am not going to make statements about mining uranium.

As I do not know.

Please tell us statistics of uranium and plutonium mines?

I understand their to be a method of producing power using pellets of material in stead of a core, which drastically minimizes the chance of having a melt down as their is a limiteed amount of fuel, however we need to have a location to discard the used fuel, I.E. Yucka mountain. No one wants to allow the Yucka site to proceed.

So with that type of thing happening on all fronts, coal fired power, natural gas, nuclear, biofuel, conventional fuel, every one wants to say not in my back yard, it is not safe.

Please tell me what form of fuel we should use to produce enough energy to keep the advancement of society moving forward, magic fairy dust?
That is what I love about this site. Where did I say I was against nuclear power?? I hate when people manipulate the “facts” and compare apples to oranges to make a point. Eh alterego must be in sales.

We may need nuclear, but as is shown time and time again, we humans get cocky and nature comes back to kick our ass.

PS do we even have a place for the radioactive waste to go yet? Would you start using a toilet before the septic tank was installed?
Brods is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2011, 07:14 PM   #18
steveo
In the band!
 
Join Date: 03-30-07
Location: montana/wyoming
Posts: 20,293
iTrader: (6)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brods View Post
What does a construction failure while building a cooling tower have to do with anything?
sorry, I quoted the wrong asshole. It was directed at alter ego's claim that no one has ever died due to nuclear power and it was heavy on the sarcasm.
steveo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2011, 07:19 PM   #19
dougstephvoor
Supreme Chancelor!
 
dougstephvoor's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-21-10
Location: Saranac/Michigan
Posts: 2,212
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brods View Post
Can someone explain why with all the remote control technology there is no vehicle, machine, blimp or copter that could be utilized via remote control to dump water or drag a hose over the top of the #4 reactor building? Some company in japan must have a blimp, strap fire hoses to it and have at it.

And what is the difficulty getting power to the cooling pumps? What size pumps are we talking about? There have got to be back up pumps, how many are there? Is there no valving that would allow hooking up to the cooling loop and bypassing the dead pumps (like with engine powered pumps or fire truck pumpers)? How are they doing it now? Seems they should be air lifting pumps, gensets, fire trucks, etc and throwing everything they got at it. Wtf?
All they need is a volunteer to drag the hose up to the top of the reactor vessel, and hold it while they pump the water in. I heard they are hiring. The pay is really good, but their is no life insurance or health insurance coverage.
dougstephvoor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2011, 07:22 PM   #20
DuffMan
Your Message Here
 
DuffMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: The Ile of Grosse
Posts: 5,837
iTrader: (11)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alterego View Post
No one has died from a nucular plant in the entire history of the technology of producing electricity or operating reactors for ships propulsion etc, except for Chernoble, which had no containment and was being operated by idiots.

More people die every year in coal minds or at refineries than has ever occured at nuclear reactors.

So to say that it is a dangerous method for creating power is an untrue statement. If you are using all other forms of power as a comparison.
The Japanese killed a few fuel processors a few years back by cutting corners.

There was a flash criticality at the USN prototype facility back in the 50s or 60s that killed a couple of sailors.

I believe the Soviets killed a few as well.

But, overall damn few compared to other energy sources - especially coal.
__________________
This is the Pub. Leave common sense at the door.
DuffMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:11 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. Runs best on HiVelocity Hosting.
Page generated in 0.53363 seconds with 80 queries