Welcome to AikiWeb Aikido Information
AikiWeb: The Source for Aikido Information
AikiWeb's principal purpose is to serve the Internet community as a repository and dissemination point for aikido information.

Sections
home
aikido articles
columns

Discussions
forums
aikiblogs

Databases
dojo search
seminars
image gallery
supplies
links directory

Reviews
book reviews
video reviews
dvd reviews
equip. reviews

News
submit
archive

Miscellaneous
newsletter
rss feeds
polls
about

Follow us on



Home > AikiWeb Aikido Forums
Go Back   AikiWeb Aikido Forums > Open Discussions

Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history, humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced features available, you will need to register first. Registration is absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-02-2011, 04:07 PM   #176
mathewjgano
 
mathewjgano's Avatar
Dojo: Tsubaki Kannagara Jinja Aikidojo; Himeji Shodokan Dojo
Location: Renton
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,232
United_States
Offline
Re: The fact that you believe a nuclear plant can explode....

I'm left pretty much where I began with this topic. I sift through my second and third-hand data and the only thing I've gained is reinforcement for the idea that radio-active materials (and their subsequent businesses) are dangerous and that people/businesses aren't to be trusted. This still doesn't suggest to me that fission or fusion energy efforts are too dangerous to work toward...only that the hoi polloi better focus more on education and direct participation in civic issues. Most of us are too busy wondering how we're going to swing that newest iPhone or find a job that pays a lot than with investigating the deeper ramifications of, well, damn near anything else.
...Not sure how this adds to the conversation exactly, but that's what my mind has to say about it...for whatever it's worth.
Thank you folks for such an information rich conversation. I've enjoyed reading it so much that it's prompted me to revisit the topic anew (I studied some of this stuff in high school and college).
Take care,
Matt

Gambarimashyo!
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2011, 04:51 PM   #177
kewms
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,318
Offline
Re: The fact that you believe a nuclear plant can explode....

Quote:
Matthew Gano wrote: View Post
This still doesn't suggest to me that fission or fusion energy efforts are too dangerous to work toward...only that the hoi polloi better focus more on education and direct participation in civic issues. Most of us are too busy wondering how we're going to swing that newest iPhone or find a job that pays a lot than with investigating the deeper ramifications of, well, damn near anything else.
The lack of an informed public is a huge problem with many issues. The average citizen knows nothing and cares less--until there's a crisis-- and most of the real experts have ties to organizations with a vested interest. That leaves a lot of room for conspiracy theories and fear-mongering that may or may not have any basis in fact.

Consider the autism vaccine scare: the doctor who started it falsified his studies and has since lost his medical license, but meanwhile the conspiracy theory has taken on a life of its own, and lots of kids have had to suffer through entirely avoidable measles episodes. (Don't read too much into this example: I picked it because it's sufficiently old news to be easier to see objectively.)

Katherine
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2011, 05:39 PM   #178
Tenyu
Dojo: Aikibodo
Location: Arcata CA
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 150
United_States
Offline
Re: The fact that you believe a nuclear plant can explode....

Quote:
Katherine Derbyshire wrote: View Post
Actually, I think the IAEA concluded that a criticality incident occurred at Chernobyl, and that's what ignited the subsequent fires.

Since the hydrogen at Fukushima came from the breakdown of water in the reactor, and the Chernobyl reactor was moderated by graphite, it's not clear where any hydrogen at Chernobyl would have come from. Chernobyl used water to produce steam, but it wouldn't have been in contact with the core until *after* the initial explosion had already occurred, bursting the pipes.

As a side note, this whole conversation has been tossing terms like "explosion" around with wild abandon, and I think at least some of the confusion may result because different people are using them in different ways.

Technically speaking, an explosion is simply the rapid release of energy, from any source. Increase the pressure in a steam boiler beyond its design limits, and it will explode. Controlled explosions are what make internal combustion engines work. So I don't view an "an explosion at Fukushima" as necessarily any more hazardous to human health than "an explosion on the Deepwater Horizon." Suppose, for example, that one of the fuel tanks for the backup generators had blown up: well clear of the reactor vessel, and therefore not in itself a terribly big deal. And yes, I suppose that a fuel tank explosion would technically meet David's claim that a "nuclear plant can blow up," but I think we all know that wasn't what he had in mind.

The scary stuff starts to happen if the rapid release of energy takes place *inside* the reactor vessel. That's what happened at Chernobyl, and that's what shot highly radioactive material all over the place. But there is no evidence that such a situation has occurred -- or could occur -- at Fukushima.

Katherine
Fission, what criticality refers to, has been going on this whole time at Fukushima. That's what the blue flashes of neutron beams are - concentrated moments of very lethal localized criticality. You didn't address 2500 tons vs 180 tons.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2011, 05:44 PM   #179
Tenyu
Dojo: Aikibodo
Location: Arcata CA
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 150
United_States
Offline
Re: The fact that you believe a nuclear plant can explode....

Quote:
Katherine Derbyshire wrote: View Post
At least those researchers have probably actually studied nuclear physics. At least those researchers have a professional stake in making sure their public statements are scientifically accurate.

Katherine
You must have missed all the reports of nuclear physicists and engineers, hired by the reactor manufacturers, who either quit or were fired for raising safety concerns throughout the past five decades. Since you didn't address my other question here's Gunderson's credentials:

http://www.fairewinds.com/content/who-we-are
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2011, 05:47 PM   #180
Tenyu
Dojo: Aikibodo
Location: Arcata CA
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 150
United_States
Offline
Re: The fact that you believe a nuclear plant can explode....

Quote:
Katherine Derbyshire wrote: View Post
The lack of an informed public is a huge problem with many issues. The average citizen knows nothing and cares less--until there's a crisis-- and most of the real experts have ties to organizations with a vested interest. That leaves a lot of room for conspiracy theories and fear-mongering that may or may not have any basis in fact.

Consider the autism vaccine scare: the doctor who started it falsified his studies and has since lost his medical license, but meanwhile the conspiracy theory has taken on a life of its own, and lots of kids have had to suffer through entirely avoidable measles episodes. (Don't read too much into this example: I picked it because it's sufficiently old news to be easier to see objectively.)

Katherine
Which doctor are you referring to? Are you claiming ethyl mercury or thimerosal is safe in any quantity to be injected in babies, children, and adults?
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2011, 06:32 PM   #181
kewms
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,318
Offline
Re: The fact that you believe a nuclear plant can explode....

Quote:
Tenyu Hamaki wrote: View Post
Which doctor are you referring to? Are you claiming ethyl mercury or thimerosal is safe in any quantity to be injected in babies, children, and adults?
I'm referring to Andrew Wakefield:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Wakefield

I take no position on the safety of any particular vaccine formulation. If I had children, I'd vaccinate them, but that's off topic for this thread anyway.

Katherine
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2011, 06:49 PM   #182
kewms
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,318
Offline
Re: The fact that you believe a nuclear plant can explode....

Quote:
Tenyu Hamaki wrote: View Post
Fission, what criticality refers to, has been going on this whole time at Fukushima. That's what the blue flashes of neutron beams are - concentrated moments of very lethal localized criticality. You didn't address 2500 tons vs 180 tons.
Actually, "criticality" specifically refers to the presence of a self-sustaining nuclear reaction. That condition has not been present at Fukushima since the emergency shutoffs kicked in after the earthquake. "Fission" is simply the normal decay process that occurs in unstable isotopes.

Which is why your "2500 ton vs 180 ton" comparison is meaningless. An active reactor core is isotopically different from the contents of a spent fuel pond. The spent fuel is going to be much more stable: that's why it's "spent."

Katherine
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2011, 07:00 PM   #183
kewms
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,318
Offline
Re: The fact that you believe a nuclear plant can explode....

Quote:
Tenyu Hamaki wrote: View Post
You must have missed all the reports of nuclear physicists and engineers, hired by the reactor manufacturers, who either quit or were fired for raising safety concerns throughout the past five decades. Since you didn't address my other question here's Gunderson's credentials:

http://www.fairewinds.com/content/who-we-are
You posted a link from the Daily Mail, a tabloid scandal sheet. You posted a link from a guy who thinks people can cure advanced cancer through "re-mineralization." You posted a map superimposing the Chernobyl fallout pattern over Japan, despite the total lack of evidence that Japan has anywhere near that level of contamination. (You linked to Greenpeace, but even their own data doesn't support that claim.)

Somewhere in there I quit bothering to check your sources, so I guess I missed the one person with some actual knowledge. Although he specializes in environmental litigation, so he has at least as strong an interest in showing that nuclear plants are dangerous as the nuclear industry has in showing they are safe.

Katherine
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2011, 07:02 PM   #184
Tenyu
Dojo: Aikibodo
Location: Arcata CA
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 150
United_States
Offline
Re: The fact that you believe a nuclear plant can explode....

Quote:
Katherine Derbyshire wrote: View Post
Actually, "criticality" specifically refers to the presence of a self-sustaining nuclear reaction. That condition has not been present at Fukushima since the emergency shutoffs kicked in after the earthquake. "Fission" is simply the normal decay process that occurs in unstable isotopes.

Which is why your "2500 ton vs 180 ton" comparison is meaningless. An active reactor core is isotopically different from the contents of a spent fuel pond. The spent fuel is going to be much more stable: that's why it's "spent."

Katherine
Try posting this at theoildrum and you would simply be ignored for being too rubbish to reply to. The spent fuel pools, without water, are undergoing fission and that's where most of the radiation's been coming from. If you've been paying attention you would know one or more of the pools was loaded last December, making it very fresh spent fuel.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2011, 07:09 PM   #185
Tenyu
Dojo: Aikibodo
Location: Arcata CA
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 150
United_States
Offline
Re: The fact that you believe a nuclear plant can explode....

Quote:
Katherine Derbyshire wrote: View Post
You posted a link from the Daily Mail, a tabloid scandal sheet. You posted a link from a guy who thinks people can cure advanced cancer through "re-mineralization." You posted a map superimposing the Chernobyl fallout pattern over Japan, despite the total lack of evidence that Japan has anywhere near that level of contamination. (You linked to Greenpeace, but even their own data doesn't support that claim.)

Somewhere in there I quit bothering to check your sources, so I guess I missed the one person with some actual knowledge. Although he specializes in environmental litigation, so he has at least as strong an interest in showing that nuclear plants are dangerous as the nuclear industry has in showing they are safe.

Katherine
Deriding the potential for holistic medicine shows how ignorant you are of quantum physics and the powerful traditions of Native Americans. You only provided a couple links in this thread one being the aptly named BraveNewClimate.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2011, 07:09 PM   #186
kewms
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,318
Offline
Re: The fact that you believe a nuclear plant can explode....

Quote:
Tenyu Hamaki wrote: View Post
Try posting this at theoildrum and you would simply be ignored for being too rubbish to reply to. The spent fuel pools, without water, are undergoing fission and that's where most of the radiation's been coming from. If you've been paying attention you would know one or more of the pools was loaded last December, making it very fresh spent fuel.
Yes, I know the spent fuel pools are undergoing fission. Yes, I know that creates radiation. If you have a granite countertop, there's a good chance that it has uranium inclusions that are undergoing fission and emitting radiation, too. Your point?

Katherine
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2011, 07:11 PM   #187
kewms
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,318
Offline
Re: The fact that you believe a nuclear plant can explode....

Quote:
Tenyu Hamaki wrote: View Post
Deriding the potential for holistic medicine shows how ignorant you are of quantum physics and the powerful traditions of Native Americans. You only provided a couple links in this thread one being the aptly named BraveNewClimate.
Did you actually read the links I provided? In particular, I might suggest this one, on fission and fission products: http://mitnse.com/2011/03/20/fission...and-radiation/

Katherine

Last edited by kewms : 04-02-2011 at 07:14 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2011, 07:14 PM   #188
Tenyu
Dojo: Aikibodo
Location: Arcata CA
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 150
United_States
Offline
Re: The fact that you believe a nuclear plant can explode....

Quote:
Katherine Derbyshire wrote: View Post

I take no position on the safety of any particular vaccine formulation.

If I had children, I'd vaccinate them.

Katherine
Unless you don't care about endangering your hypothetical children, then you are taking a position on vaccines. If your mind weren't closed, you would learn a lot from Dr Ayoub's hour and half video presentation.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2011, 07:17 PM   #189
kewms
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,318
Offline
Re: The fact that you believe a nuclear plant can explode....

Quote:
Tenyu Hamaki wrote: View Post
Deriding the potential for holistic medicine shows how ignorant you are of quantum physics and the powerful traditions of Native Americans. You only provided a couple links in this thread one being the aptly named BraveNewClimate.
*shrug* The guy who taught me quantum physics won a Nobel Prize a few years ago. I don't claim to know everything he knows, but I'm pretty confident in my understanding.

Katherine
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2011, 09:25 PM   #190
RonRagusa
Dojo: Berkshire Hills Aikido
Location: Massachusetts
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 809
United_States
Offline
Re: The fact that you believe a nuclear plant can explode....

From a story in the NY Times published 4/2/11 written by William J. Broad:

"For example, an analysis by a French energy company revealed far more about the condition of the plant’s reactors than the Japanese have ever described: water levels at the reactor cores dropping by as much as three-quarters, and temperatures in those cores soaring to nearly 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit, hot enough to burn and melt the zirconium casings that protect the fuel rods."

and

"Now, as a result of the crisis in Japan, the atomic simulations suggest that the number of serious accidents has suddenly doubled, with three of the reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi complex in some stage of meltdown. Even so, the public authorities have sought to avoid grim technical details that might trigger alarm or even panic.

“They don’t want to go there,” said Robert Alvarez, a nuclear expert who, from 1993 to 1999, was a policy adviser to the secretary of energy. “The spin is all about reassurance.”"

Here's a link to the whole article

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/03/sc...er=rss&emc=rss
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2011, 09:53 PM   #191
David Orange
Dojo: Aozora Dojo
Location: Birmingham, AL
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,511
United_States
Offline
Re: The fact that you believe a nuclear plant can explode....

Quote:
Katherine Derbyshire wrote: View Post
*sigh*
I'd be "sighing" too, if I were trying to defend the claim that Fukushima Dai Ichi didn't "blow up".

Quote:
Katherine Derbyshire wrote: View Post
...I don't know what sort of "explosion" David has in mind.
I have in mind the kind of "explosion" that reduces an industrial building to a mass of rubble. Like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_N-wNFSGyQ

What kind do you have in mind? Apparently not that kind of "explosion," huh? I don't think you'd be around to tell us about it.

Obviously, if you were in a room with a hydrogen combustion, it wasn't the kind of "combustion" that occurred at Fukushima. That one was an "explosion." It fairly destroyed the building.

Quote:
Katherine Derbyshire wrote: View Post
No one -- not even Tepco -- is denying that a partial core meltdown has occurred at Fukushima. The debate is about what the consequences of that are.
Well, one of the consequences was the release of hydrogen, the "explosion" of which destroyed the building. It's theorized that this "explosion" also breeched the reactor containment vessel, exposing the reactor core to the environment. I'm scientific enough that I don't claim this actually happened, though I think it did. I just won't say that it definitely did. I think it "probably" did. A little time will tell.

Katherine[/quote]

Last edited by David Orange : 04-02-2011 at 09:55 PM.

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu

"Eternity forever!"

www.esotericorange.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2011, 10:22 PM   #192
David Orange
Dojo: Aozora Dojo
Location: Birmingham, AL
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,511
United_States
Offline
Re: The fact that you believe a nuclear plant can explode....

Quote:
Katherine Derbyshire wrote: View Post
As a side note, this whole conversation has been tossing terms like "explosion" around with wild abandon, and I think at least some of the confusion may result because different people are using them in different ways.
Look at the the title of the thread, Katherine. This conversation comes from an ealier thread on nuclear accidents in which I said that a nuclear plant can explode. Someone told me "The fact that you believe that a nuclear plant can explode shows just how little you understand about the subject."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_N-wNFSGyQ

THAT is what I meant by saying a nuclear plant can explode. And it seems that that explosion produced just what I feared it would: a cracked containment vessel.

I made clear in the first thread as well as in this thread that I didn't mean that a nuclear plant would blow up like a nuclear bomb. What about the explosion at Fukushima do you fail to understand as an explosion? Strings of technical jargon cannot obfuscate the fact that Fukushima Dai Ichi exploded. There's no way you can explain that away.

Quote:
Katherine Derbyshire wrote: View Post
I suppose that a fuel tank explosion would technically meet David's claim that a "nuclear plant can blow up," but I think we all know that wasn't what he had in mind.
No, what i had in mind was some kind of explosion, either inside or outside the reactor containment vessel that could cause the core to be exposed. And I was told that that could not happen. But, again, it apparently has. In any case, even if it didn't breech the reactor vessel, they were storing nuclear material on the roof of the plant and that pretty certainly melted down and released nuclear material into the environment. And mark my word, the release is far worse than the for-profit corporation responsible has admitted.

Quote:
Katherine Derbyshire wrote: View Post
The scary stuff starts to happen if the rapid release of energy takes place *inside* the reactor vessel.
Er....unless the nuclear material is stored on the roof of the building that explodes....Or... if the explosion breeches the containment of the core, which then melts down, which also apparently happened at Fukushima.

Quote:
Katherine Derbyshire wrote: View Post
That's what happened at Chernobyl, and that's what shot highly radioactive material all over the place. But there is no evidence that such a situation has occurred -- or could occur -- at Fukushima.
But you can't deny that Fukushima did explode and released plutonium and cesium 137. And the containment vessel was likely ruptured and the core has likely been exposed and has at least partially melted down. If that's not "scary" to you, then I will buy you a ticket to go there and live inisde the "exclusion zone." You'll have your pick of the nicest houses to live in and you can retire on the wonderful book you can write while you live your quiet and peaceful life in perfect safety.

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu

"Eternity forever!"

www.esotericorange.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2011, 10:24 PM   #193
David Orange
Dojo: Aozora Dojo
Location: Birmingham, AL
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,511
United_States
Offline
Re: The fact that you believe a nuclear plant can explode....

Quote:
Ron Ragusa wrote: View Post
The latest news from Fukushima is of radioactive water leaking into the ocean from a breached maintenance pit. We get these little tidbits interspersed between the stories about how things are looking up, super pumps being brought in that can pump concrete as well as water etc. Still, the salient fact is that the plant continues to leak radiation.
Don't worry about it, Ron. Katherine Derbyshire is selling radiation-shielding explanations. Just wrap those around you and filter your food and water through them. Safe and sound!!!!

David

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu

"Eternity forever!"

www.esotericorange.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2011, 10:28 PM   #194
David Orange
Dojo: Aozora Dojo
Location: Birmingham, AL
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,511
United_States
Offline
Re: The fact that you believe a nuclear plant can explode....

Quote:
Katherine Derbyshire wrote: View Post
Consider the autism vaccine scare: the doctor who started it falsified his studies ...
So comparing this to the topic at hand....the nuclear industry and the governments behind them have shoveled tons of false information onto the public. And another nuclear plant has blown up and we're supposed to protect ourselves with flimsy explanations that are clearly false.

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu

"Eternity forever!"

www.esotericorange.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2011, 10:32 PM   #195
David Orange
Dojo: Aozora Dojo
Location: Birmingham, AL
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,511
United_States
Offline
Re: The fact that you believe a nuclear plant can explode....

Quote:
Katherine Derbyshire wrote: View Post
Given the sources Tenyu has been relying on, I wouldn't be quite so quick to take his side...
He provided some very credible documentaries that detailed the actual incidents at Chernobyl and other reactors. And you've made a number of statements that have panned out false and misleading. It's not your area of expertise. I've no doubt you're highly qualified in your field but you seem to be relying pretty much on wishful thinking where nuclear power is concerned.

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu

"Eternity forever!"

www.esotericorange.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2011, 07:44 AM   #196
RonRagusa
Dojo: Berkshire Hills Aikido
Location: Massachusetts
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 809
United_States
Offline
Re: The fact that you believe a nuclear plant can explode....

More news:

"TOKYO, April 3 (Xinhua) -- Japan's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency said Sunday that efforts to stem the flow of radioactive water leaking from the troubled No. 2 reactor building of the stricken Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the Pacific Ocean have as yet been unsuccessful.
Earlier Sunday engineers injected 80 kilograms of a polymer- based powder into pipes leading to a pit connected to the plant's No. 2 reactor's building, where a 20-centimeter crack has been found to be leaking radioactive water.

The polymeric powder is water absorbent and can soak up 50- times its own volume in liquid and was used in conjunction with 60 kilograms of sawdust and three bags of shredded newspaper, the agency said.

But the flow of contaminated water continues to exude from the seafront pit, the agency said, although the rate of leakage has remained the same and the concoction of absorbent materials have not been flushed into the sea, the agency said.

Earlier moves to stem the flow including attempts to encase the cracked pipe in concrete also failed leaving the agency to now wait until Monday until the plant's operator Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) can provide new data to check if Sunday's efforts to prevent radioactive substances flowing freely into the ocean have had any effect at all."

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english201...c_13811984.htm
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2011, 09:27 AM   #197
graham christian
Dojo: golden center aikido-highgate
Location: london
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,697
England
Offline
Re: The fact that you believe a nuclear plant can explode....

Hi peolple.

Interesting thread. I do like the debate. I'd just like to add my ten pence worth be it of any use or not.

I do think that more people than you realize do see the dangers and ramifications of nuclear or radiation, even down to their mobile phones. However, I prefer to take on the challenge mentally of looking for the best solution or ideas towards that end.

It's easy to just be against and gather data to back up an argument and be right but unfortunately proving you're right doesn't lead to much good necessarily. It usually leads to 'we're right so get rid of' logic.

The topic of the dangers of nuclear I think most of the public already agree with without even knowing much data at all. The fact that invested interests will lie and spin to get you to believe otherwise I think most of the public sees also. So we go back to what is the real problem here? (Not, I hasten to add what is the real fear here.)

The problem as I see it is a lack of wisdom and responsibility.

Responsibility: The 'responsibility' the vested interests have is to protect themselves through whatever means. This is negative or false responsibility.

The 'responsibility' of those agaist is to expose and get rid of, punish, etc. again a false responsibility. (once again by any means)

The solution is therefore to do with a wise, responsible solution.

First you would have to want one rather than just stick to your own fixed views.

So the situation actually is to do not with money but in truth it's to do with wise policy. Wise policy is missing.

The scene we live in is called democracy.

Therefore the first policy to do with a matter of nuclear plants, a thing that brings about extreme fears in the population would be to to have a referendom as to whether to have them in the first place. That would be the policy number one.

After much debate etc. and if the result was in favour the it would be time for wise policy number two.

Still taking the major fears into consideration you would have to come up with a policy to allay such.

So the policy would be a nuclear plant could only be built in an area where the local community were in favour. by vote, of having one in their area. (This would then bring them into the equasion rather than being dismissed)

Third policy would be that all monitoring and policing of the plant would be done by a body made up of people outside of vested interest and thus would include over 50% of local public people. This would therefore be a situation of the people ensuring the safe running of industrial plant from the view of health and safety.

This is my preliminary thinking on the matter and offered as food for thought.

I hope it is taken as such and hopefully leads to others coming up with 'better ways' of dealing with the problem.

My basic premise is this: If you come up with a truly wise and harmonious solution then you can present it and move mountains.

Regards.G.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2011, 11:38 AM   #198
David Orange
Dojo: Aozora Dojo
Location: Birmingham, AL
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,511
United_States
Offline
Re: The fact that you believe a nuclear plant can explode....

Quote:
Graham Christian wrote: View Post
So the policy would be a nuclear plant could only be built in an area where the local community were in favour. by vote, of having one in their area. (This would then bring them into the equasion rather than being dismissed)
What's a "local area" where nuclear plants are concerned?

We're getting radiation from Fukushima here in Alabama. France and Germany were radiated (and are still contaminated) by fall-out from Chernobyl.

Where nuclear plants are concerned, there is no such thing as a "local area." We're all in the "local area".

Unfortunately.

David

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu

"Eternity forever!"

www.esotericorange.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2011, 04:11 PM   #199
graham christian
Dojo: golden center aikido-highgate
Location: london
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,697
England
Offline
Re: The fact that you believe a nuclear plant can explode....

Quote:
David Orange wrote: View Post
What's a "local area" where nuclear plants are concerned?

We're getting radiation from Fukushima here in Alabama. France and Germany were radiated (and are still contaminated) by fall-out from Chernobyl.

Where nuclear plants are concerned, there is no such thing as a "local area." We're all in the "local area".

Unfortunately.

David
Granted David. However that is after the event. If you think my idea through and put people like yourself on the body in charge of making as sure as possible that no leaks or catastrophes would happen then possibly that is the wy foreward.

So I ask you to stop on your 'crusade' for just a minute or two and see what such a board would lead to. With peiple like yourself and others on this thread I'm sure you would come up with all the various necessary actions such a place would have to conform to.

By connecting with others from vaeious fields, as would be your job, the direction would be to safer and safer.

Remember, this is all based on if they are to be kept or built.

Remember also that I believe 99% of all industrial 'accidents' are down to bad maintainence. This being due to short term economic considerations and the belief that maintainence is a 'cost' and therefore non profitable. Precisely what the body would make happen instead.

Who knows, maybe such a body would come up with rule that no nuclear plant can operate unless they discover a solution to radiation. Or even they could force the government to set up and fund research to such an end.

I remember seeing a video on the net once about a group of people in the U.S. who have built a whole industrial complex that can handle all waste known to man. I wonder if anyone knows of this here for I forgot what it was called.

The technology used was a super heat technology, like laser, I'm sure you or someone would have the correct terminology. Anyway to my understanding it thus melted or turned to gas all physical waste and then all the different gasses and liquids were thus redirected and syphoned off into gas cylinders etc ready for use.

99% green and world waste problem solved. Apparently they were pushing congress but bumping into vested interests.

I don't know if radiation can be used for anything useful or even changed into something useful. Everyone believes it can't but has there ever been a scientist who said it could?

Anyway, more thoughts only.

Regards.G.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2011, 04:18 PM   #200
David Orange
Dojo: Aozora Dojo
Location: Birmingham, AL
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,511
United_States
Offline
Re: The fact that you believe a nuclear plant can explode....

Quote:
Graham Christian wrote: View Post
I don't know if radiation can be used for anything useful or even changed into something useful. Everyone believes it can't but has there ever been a scientist who said it could?
The technology is already here, Graham.

It's called "solar energy." It results from hydrogen fusion 193,000,000 miles from here.

It converts radiation from the big reactor in the sky into electricity, through "photovoltaic" cells. It converts solar radiation into heat to warm water, air, food and other things. It can melt steel and it can cook food.

Through careful combination of exposure to and blocking of solar radiation, we can heat, cool, light and charge all manner of things. Once our buildings are created with full consciousness of manipulation of solar energy, this balance can be maintained with almost no moving parts and virtually no waste.

Thank you.

David

Last edited by David Orange : 04-03-2011 at 04:22 PM.

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu

"Eternity forever!"

www.esotericorange.com
  Reply With Quote

Please visit our sponsor:

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!



Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

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

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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 18 Peter Goldsbury Columns 187 09-08-2011 02:41 PM
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 17 Peter Goldsbury Columns 41 06-03-2010 09:46 PM
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 14 Peter Goldsbury Columns 38 07-31-2009 11:19 PM
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 12 Peter Goldsbury Columns 32 05-16-2009 06:05 PM
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 10 Peter Goldsbury Columns 200 02-04-2009 06:45 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:08 AM.



vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2018 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
----------
Copyright 1997-2018 AikiWeb and its Authors, All Rights Reserved.
----------
For questions and comments about this website:
Send E-mail
plainlaid-picaresque outchasing-protistan explicantia-altarage seaford-stellionate