| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
scienceplease 2
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 06 Apr 2009
Posts: 1702
|
 Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2011 7:06 am Post subject: Nuclear Power - needed only for bombs |
 |
|
I think this forum needs its own area to campaign against nuclear power. The only reason I know that nuclear power is continually backed by the industrial-military complex is the need for a steady supply of scientists and engineers that can be siphoned off to make and maintain nuclear bombs...
To re-iterate: Nuclear Power is only needed only for bombs...
The whitewash of the china syndrome at Fukishima is just part of a wider move to "sell" nuclear power to the public. Making people think that nuclear is green! Just look at those rip-off EDF adverts, green union jacks and 20% by 2020 - (stolen from green power company ecotricity and 10% by 2010)...
And here's yet another reason to condemn nuclear power...
http://www.nuclearfreeplanet.org/articles/scottish-nuclear-fuel-leak-w ill-never-be-completely-cleaned-up.html
| Quote: | Scottish nuclear fuel leak will never be completely cleaned up
Much as DOE officials at the US Washington State Hanford site have admitted that Hanford will never be truly remediated, officials in Scotland have thrown in the towel on cleaning up the radioactive waste that was allowed to leak for decades from the Dounreay nuclear plant. Saying they will do the best they can, but that their best will not be sufficient is poor consolation for those who remain at risk from still highly radioactive material washing up on beaches and resting in the seabed.
To all who say that nuclear power is safe, clean, and inexpensive- we must reply back: look at the cost of the impossibility of remediation. It is hugely expensive financially; and brutal in human health costs, and environmental devastation. It is, in the end, almost always unsuccesful. The radioactive waste will remain, long after the money, a healthy environment, and perhaps the human race itself, are gone. Is this a strategically viable plan for energy production when we have truly sustainable alternatives? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
scienceplease 2
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 06 Apr 2009
Posts: 1702
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
scienceplease 2
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 06 Apr 2009
Posts: 1702
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 8:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.nuclearfreeplanet.org/fukushima-victims-nuclear-power-bad.h tml
| Quote: | | Residents of Fukushima teach nuclear power far too dangerous! Nuclear reactors' explosions ruined their city, homes, farms, employment, health, food, friendships. They tell of government's raising allowable radiation limits to high levels regarded elsewhere as life-threatening, of the nuclear industry bribing officials, judges, An American expert talks of GE knowing their design unsafe and many such reactors in operation in the US, of NRC routinely re-licensing aging reactors here that should be taken out of service. Nuclear catastrophes are waiting to happen in the US. |
Sounds like a conspiracy to me. 
Any reason why this tagging (below) doesn't work?
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=gNSrCX eQJEo#![/youtube] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Disco_Destroyer
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 05 Sep 2006
Posts: 6342
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
scienceplease 2
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 06 Apr 2009
Posts: 1702
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2011 11:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks, DD.
It's interesting that articles like this are around... and high up on google's search list
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2011/03/mini-faq-japan-nuclear-power-p lants-crisis-nukes.php
| Quote: | | The good news is that potential exposure seems extremely low even for people who are close and likely to remain so. |
Or according to other independent observers....
| Quote: | ...the Fukushima power plant pulled spent fuel bundles (a collection of fuel rods) and stored them on site rather than shipping them to another location.... This vastly compounds the problem of any meltdown, as this spent fuel will add to the contamination [because] it is extremely toxic.
In other words, as well as dealing with a potential meltdown, you also have the toxic products from the depleted fuel pins adding to the pollution. This is extraordinarily bad. The spent fuel bundles should have been relocated away from the reactor core a long, long time ago. Given the earthquake realities of Japan, these reactor building were basically dirty bombs waiting to be set off by a [natural] disaster.”
... Radiation levels are rising so rapidly that it’s not even safe to work near the plant. This is very rapidly headed into a situation where suicidal volunteers are going to have to “rush in” and do some work on the plant, spend only a few minutes there, then evacuate as quickly as possible. And they’ll still get cancer. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TonyGosling
Editor
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 18335
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 5:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Triple blow hits UK nuclear revival
http://www.link2portal.com/triple-blow-hits-uk-nuclear-revival
Thursday 4th October 2012
The drop-out of bidders for nuclear operator Horizon, opposition from the one British community that might host buried nuclear waste, and a damning European report on existing plant safety, all provide new headaches for nuclear supporters.
On the Horizon
Just two bidders have emerged for Horizon, the nuclear company seeking to build two new reactors in Britain, following the expiry of a deadline last Friday for expressions of interest in purchasing the option.
In both cases it is unsure where the hundreds of millions of pounds of investment will come from, that could eventually see a new nuclear power station built on either of the company's sites, in Oldbury, Gloucestershire and Wylfa, Anglesey.
Last week, three consortiums were expected to throw their hats into the ring: France's Areva, partnered with China's Guangdong Nuclear Power Group, both state-owned; one led by Japan's Hitachi; and Japan's Westinghouse Electric Co., partnered with China’s State Nuclear Power Technology Corp and Exelon, the US power generator.
Areva failed to submit a bid. Hitachi did, and Westinghouse did, but without its Chinese partner, who would have provided substantial experience of delivering nuclear power stations on time and within budget.
Areva's European Pressurised Reactor (EPR) design is further ahead than Westinghouse's in the UK's generic design assessment approval process. Westinghouse' put their process on hold last December.
Its AP1000 nuclear reactor design is, in turn, further on than Hitachi's Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR), which has yet to be submitted to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), although it is licensed in the US, Japan and Taiwan.
Four ABWRs are already operating in Japan, with a fifth 94% completed.
No AP1000 reactor has yet been completed, although four are under construction in China, and two proposals have been given approval in the US.
Two builds of Areva's EPR design, in France and Finland, have experienced massive hold-ups and budgetary excesses.
EDF has yet to decide whether to proceed with construction of an EPR plant at Hinkley Point.
The process of approval of the EPR design issues by the Health and Safety Executive can be followed online here, where it can be seen that the majority of issues have yet to be resolved.
The only other contender for new nuclear power station building in the UK is NuGen, which is owned by GDF SUEZ and IBERDROLA. Their plans to implement 3.6GW of electricity generation at the Moorside site adjacent to Sellafield are also on hold.
Any potential backers for building new nuclear power stations, which would undoubtedly include Chinese money, are waiting for clarity on the level of government support that will be available following the passing of the Energy Bill, currently winding its way through Parliament.
Existing nuclear waste headache
Meanwhile, there is renewed uncertainty also about what to do with Britain's existing legacy of nuclear waste.
Friday was also decision day for the three Cumbrian councils who represent the only community in the country which has said it might host an underground dump for the country's most radioactive materials.
Presently, these are stored at Sellafield in cooling tanks above ground.
The leaders of Cumbria county council, and Allerdale and Copeland borough councils, cited their desire to have legally enshrined their right to withdraw from the process at any time, and a “lack of trust" between the public and the government, as reasons for postponing their decision until January next year.
They issued a statement which also throws into doubt the suitability of the chosen site: "One of the biggest concerns for many residents of Cumbria has been whether the geology of the area is suitable for a repository.
"Although a few geologists believe there is already enough evidence to show that West Cumbria’s geology is unsuitable, most of the experts agree that there is not enough definitive information available at this time."
Managing the UK's existing nuclear waste already eats up more than half of the annual budget of the Department for Energy and Climate Change (DECC), a proportion which is expected to rise.
The councils will be seeking clarification from DECC on a number of issues.
Nuclear reactor safety questioned
Lastly, a European Commission report released in draft form yesterday says that there are many potentially huge and expensive problems with the safety of the majority of nuclear plants operating in the European Union.
"On the basis of the stress test results practically all [nuclear plants] need to undergo safety improvements," says the leaked draft. "Hundreds of technical upgrade measures have already been identified."
This survey was produced in response to the Fukushima accident in Japan last year.
It puts the cost of the safety upgrades at a total of between €10 and €25bn, or €30m to €200m for each reactor.
134 nuclear reactors are in operation in 14 EU countries, of which 111, at 47 plants, have over 100,000 people living within a radius of 30km.
Most worryingly, the report finds that four reactors, located in two different nations, have less than one hour available to restore safety functions if electrical power is lost.
At the other extreme, four countries operate additional safety systems fully independent from the normal safety measures and located in areas well-protected against external events. A fifth nation is considering that option.
The draft report notes that two member states have still not provided information, but does not identify them.
The UK government commissioned its own report on existing British reactors in the wake of the Fukushima disaster, which gave them the all clear.
However the EU report points out that most UK reactors do not have an alternative control room that could be used in the event that the main one became unsafe.
A DECC spokesperson commented that there was no evidence that British nuclear reactors were unsafe, adding that "the government is committed to the principle of continuous improvement".
The final version of the European report is to be published later this month, and the Commission will make its recommendations shortly afterwards, including proposing laws on insurance and liability to "improve the situation of potential victims in the event of a nuclear accident".
Environmental campaigners pointed out that, although it is comprehensive and devastating, the report misses out further risks in crucial areas, such as ageing technology, terrorist attacks or human error.
"If this exercise was serious, the Commission should be recommending the closure of unsafe or ageing reactors," said Rebecca Harms, co-president of the Greens/European Free Alliance at the European Parliament
_________________
www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org
www.rethink911.org
www.patriotsquestion911.com
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
scienceplease 2
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 06 Apr 2009
Posts: 1702
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 11, 2013 5:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Two years later, finally the MSM are leaking out the real story. But, hey, is anyone listening?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21737910
| Quote: |
It would be reassuring to think that the world's worst nuclear disaster since Chernobyl is contained, and the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant is in stable shut-down.
Unfortunately a look inside the Fukushima plant suggests otherwise.
I was part of a group taken in to the Fukushima plant last week, only the second time foreign TV journalists have been allowed in since the disaster two year ago. Very little that we saw in our brief two-hour tour was reassuring.
Our first stop was reactor building number four. This place was potentially the most worrying.
Inside the shattered building, more than 1,500 spent fuel rods were still sitting inside a cooling pool. They were still highly radioactive and the pool was outside the reactor's steel and concrete containment vessel, perched high on the third floor.
Around 3,000 workers are still trying to clean up the site
A race is now on to get the fuel rods out. A huge steel structure is being erected around building four that will be used to raise the spent fuel out.
But that operation will not start until the end of this year, and will then take two more years to complete. If another large earthquake strikes during that time there is real concern the building could collapse.
Tepco, the company that runs the plant, told us the building was now strong enough to withstand another quake. But contractors who have worked inside building four have reported that the structure is still extremely fragile.
Reactor number four was only the tip of a radioactive iceberg. Two hundred meters away I could clearly see the twisted and rusting steel of reactor building number three.
Two years after the disaster it was still virtually untouched. The reason was simple. The radiation at reactor three was so high workers could not safely go near it.
Our bus rushed past without stopping. The Geiger counter reading was over 1,000 micro sieverts an hour. That is roughly the same as ten chest X-rays every hour, or a full CT scan every ten hours.
Like reactor four, reactor three had spent fuel rods sitting inside a cooling pool beneath the twisted steel and rubble. Remotely-operated cranes are being used to try and pull away the debris, but it is a painfully slow process.
Tepco's other huge problem is contaminated water, tens of thousands of tonnes of it.
The 9.0 earthquake that struck two years ago appears to have severely damaged the foundations of the plant - creating large cracks in the underground walls that are supposed to keep the plant water tight.
Ground and seawater is now leaking through the cracks in to the basements around the reactors.
The water rapidly becomes highly contaminated and cannot be pumped out into the sea. Instead Tepco is building huge 1,000 tonne water tanks to store the contaminated water.
The Fukushima sight is now dotted with hundreds of them. But the water leakage is so severe that they are having to add a new tank every two to three days. Within two years they will have run out of room.
Uncharted territory
At the end of our tour we were given 10 minutes with the plant manager, Takeshi Takahashi. Mr Takahashi looked exhausted, dark rings around his eyes.
After a long apology for the "inconvenience" caused by the nuclear disaster, Mr Takahashi explained just how long and difficult the clean up would be.
"We need to remove the broken and damaged fuel and safely isolate it. This work will take 30 to 40 years. Even during the process we should never release any radioactive material into the surrounding environment."
Nuclear three reactor Radiation at reactor number three is so high that workers cannot go near the site
It would be easy for an outsider like me to criticise him: why were they not working faster? Why did they still not know what was going on inside the melted-down reactors?
But the truth is no-one would wish a job like Mr Takahashi's on their worst enemy. No one has ever dealt with a situation like this before. He and his 3,000 staff are venturing in to completely uncharted territory.
And, according to most observers, they are, after a poor start, doing most things right.
But the scale of their task is daunting, and it will decades before anyone can truly say the Fukushima disaster is over, and the threat from the plant contained. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
scienceplease 2
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 06 Apr 2009
Posts: 1702
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 5:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Atom bomb falls to earth in USA - one low voltage switch away from disaster
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/20/usaf-atomic-bomb-north-ca rolina-1961
| Quote: | A secret document, published in declassified form for the first time by the Guardian today, reveals that the US Air Force came dramatically close to detonating an atom bomb over North Carolina that would have been 260 times more powerful than the device that devastated Hiroshima.
The document, obtained by the investigative journalist Eric Schlosser under the Freedom of Information Act, gives the first conclusive evidence that the US was narrowly spared a disaster of monumental proportions when two Mark 39 hydrogen bombs were accidentally dropped over Goldsboro, North Carolina on 23 January 1961. The bombs fell to earth after a B-52 bomber broke up in mid-air, and one of the devices behaved precisely as a nuclear weapon was designed to behave in warfare: its parachute opened, its trigger mechanisms engaged, and only one low-voltage switch prevented untold carnage. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fish5133
Site Admin
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 2568
Location: One breath from Glory
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 10:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| scienceplease 2 wrote: | Atom bomb falls to earth in USA - one low voltage switch away from disaster
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/20/usaf-atomic-bomb-north-ca rolina-1961
| Quote: | A secret document, published in declassified form for the first time by the Guardian today, reveals that the US Air Force came dramatically close to detonating an atom bomb over North Carolina that would have been 260 times more powerful than the device that devastated Hiroshima.
The document, obtained by the investigative journalist Eric Schlosser under the Freedom of Information Act, gives the first conclusive evidence that the US was narrowly spared a disaster of monumental proportions when two Mark 39 hydrogen bombs were accidentally dropped over Goldsboro, North Carolina on 23 January 1961. The bombs fell to earth after a B-52 bomber broke up in mid-air, and one of the devices behaved precisely as a nuclear weapon was designed to behave in warfare: its parachute opened, its trigger mechanisms engaged, and only one low-voltage switch prevented untold carnage. |
|
Now that would have been one hell of a false flag opportunity
_________________
JO911B.
"for we wrestle not against flesh and blood but against principalities, against powers, against rulers of the darkness of this world, against wicked spirits in high places " Eph.6 v 12 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
