Scott Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 Between nuclear energy and no or very little energy, I'll go with nuclear. That said, however, I am quite appreciative of the anti-nuclear people who make sure that plants won't be built willy-nilly and who make all of us aware of the dangers and hold both governments and the private sector accountable for what they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elcent Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 Between nuclear energy and no or very little energy, I'll go with nuclear. That said, however, I am quite appreciative of the anti-nuclear people who make sure that plants won't be built willy-nilly and who make all of us aware of the dangers and hold both governments and the private sector accountable for what they do. The problem lies with people and not so much with technical issues. This has always been the case and always will be unless we outlaw all kind of secrecies, secret societies (the SecreTs) including military secrecies. As everybody knows, a knife is not a knife when it is used to kill someone. 911, Fukushima, E-coli outbreak just a few to mention. (In meanwhile the Germans found that the e-coli is in water, sprouts a stem of a bacteria resistant to all known anit-biotics which can by no means gow or develope resistance on vegetables. - Exactly as I expected) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScubaBuddha Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 where on earth or venus.... are you living....? by deaths.... do you mean in terms of legality or science or medicine....? ScubaBuddha, better hurry back to earth soon.... or you may find once upon a time the green and peaceful earth is no longer peaceful and green any longer.... Are you saying my facts are wrong? Which ones? Can you provide any support to your assertions that people are currently "dieing a slow an agonizing death" from radiation at Fukushima? Sorry, I don't know what you mean by death of "legality, science or medicine." Nuclear power is green power. Even the founder of Greenpeace has said that. Those that understand it already know that. Those that don't, fear it. Some of those that fear it spread that fear. It is 9.0 earthquakes and 12m tsunamis are dangerous, not nuclear power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScubaBuddha Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 Thanks for those hard facts. Makes a change from all the usual "crystal ball" posts here: "We're all going to die" & "The planet cannot take it any more" You're right about the real tragedy here - media pressure, politicians electioneering... it's as if the lowest intellect will win because everyone has an equal vote, irrespective of whether their vote comes from an educated brain. so your summation is from an educated brain, i presumed, might i? so the educated brain here and there and everywhere would agree with you and preferred radioactive byproducts over green nature....? more than half of the brains (?) visiting or residing in and around thaivisa prefer green over nuclear radio isotopes.... it is very much like explosive.... did you ever see any nation use explosive for peace.... yes, for heavens sake.... they used them frequently in the name of peace.... which differed singnificantly.... don't you agree....? humans survive very well without all these man made dangerous byproducts in the name of progression and science.... by the grace bestowed upon me, and as long as i still reside under his and her majesty grace in thailand.... i and a handful others shall see to it that commercial nuclear power generating plants shall forever ramain as blue print on the table and in a wooden cabinet somewhere.... Sorry, I can't understand your meandering, nonsensical ravings. Have you perhaps been exposed to high levels of radiation recently? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 Although the post is difficult to understand, let's keep it civil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elcent Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 This action lasted less thean 24 hours. They started on Friday to recycle radioactive mud in the containers and stopped early Saturday. The intervall of cleaning up the mess was designed for one month, but reached the limit within 24 hours already, the reason to stop it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vont Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 Thanks for those hard facts. Makes a change from all the usual "crystal ball" posts here: "We're all going to die" & "The planet cannot take it any more" You're right about the real tragedy here - media pressure, politicians electioneering... it's as if the lowest intellect will win because everyone has an equal vote, irrespective of whether their vote comes from an educated brain. .....it's as if the lowest intellect will win because everyone has an equal vote, irrespective of whether their vote comes from an educated brain. so your summation is from an educated brain, i presumed? so the educated brain would agree with you and they also preferred radioactive byproducts over green nature....? more than half of the brains (?) in thaivisa would in my estimation prefer green over nuclear radio isotopes.... humans survive very well without all these man made dangerous byproducts in the name of progression and science.... by the grace bestowed upon me, and as long as i still reside under his and her majesty grace in thailand.... i and a handful others shall see to it that commercial nuclear power generating plants shall forever ramain as blue print on the table and in a wooden cabinet somewhere.... Sorry, I can't understand your meandering, nonsensical ravings. Have you perhaps been exposed to high levels of radiation recently? NOW DO YOU UNDERSTAND IT ANY BETTER? ScubaBuddha when you read my response, nonsensical as you called it; if you were to stay focus a little.... that would surely increase your comprehension quite a bit more on what is being conveyed in the passage. when someone says something or writes something that does not fit into your cognition, you immediately retort to calling it nonsensical.... is this a habit or a defense mechanism or both, i wonder.... however, if you were to read it just like a bed time story, i won't blame you at all that you would not be able to understand whatever message contained therein. i wonder sometimes whether it is the writer or the reader who is more directly responsible.... when a reader complains about incomprehensibility.... anyway, if you still can not fathom the meaning and the message, i'll promise to rewrite sometimes, ok? for now, i humbly apologize that you are not comprehending....:jap: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vont Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 where on earth or venus.... are you living....? by deaths.... do you mean in terms of legality or science or medicine....? ScubaBuddha, better hurry back to earth soon.... or you may find once upon a time the green and peaceful earth is no longer peaceful and green any longer.... Are you saying my facts are wrong? Which ones? Can you provide any support to your assertions that people are currently "dieing a slow an agonizing death" from radiation at Fukushima? Sorry, I don't know what you mean by death of "legality, science or medicine." Nuclear power is green power. Even the founder of Greenpeace has said that. Those that understand it already know that. Those that don't, fear it. Some of those that fear it spread that fear. It is 9.0 earthquakes and 12m tsunamis are dangerous, not nuclear power. ScubaBuddha.... sorry i did not notice this post of yours earlier, otherwise i would have surely taken it first.... my apology.... with over 3,000 posts under your name.... and you are telling me that.... you do not understand the meaning of death which has varying meanings under laws, medicine and science....? amazing indeed.... alright, i promise you if you were to google it any which way you like, you would find out easily that what i said is nothing but the truth.... in its most simplistic term.... too.... try google it--death in terms of laws, medicine and science .... if by now you still are unable to find out how the affected populations are dying a very slow death.... in and around Fukushima.... i really have nothing more to add to your knowledge or the lack of it.... sorry.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheWalkingMan Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 Latest measurements as of this month by the Japanese Ministry of Agriculture: Link to PDF file Cesium found in green tea from Shizuoka at French airport NATIONAL JUN. 18, 2011 - 04:07PM JST ( 31 ) PARIS — The French government has decided to dispose of green tea shipped from Japan’s Shizuoka Prefecture after detecting radioactive cesium above the European Union’s limit at Charles de Gaulle airport, its official said Friday. You want some tea? TheWalkingMan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midas Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQeDOj2FHpE&feature=player_embedded#at=144 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elcent Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 http://www.youtube.c...embedded#at=144 there's no safe unsignificant amount of radiation. It depends where it ends up in your body. Therefore babies are the most vulnerable. The plutonium plumes(from unit 3) will be around and spreading and landing in places and stay there for millions of years. 0,0000001 gram is enough to kill an adult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsetBkk Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQeDOj2FHpE&feature=player_embedded#at=144 Near the end of this ridiculous scare mongering "report": "Also, we should point out no autopsy information regarding these infant deaths and radiation is available right now." So it's all BS spouted by someone from the "Radiation and Public Health Project". Clearly, he must be totally unbiased. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puschl Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 http://www.youtube.c...embedded#at=144 Near the end of this ridiculous scare mongering "report": "Also, we should point out no autopsy information regarding these infant deaths and radiation is available right now." So it's all BS spouted by someone from the "Radiation and Public Health Project". Clearly, he must be totally unbiased. The reporter and the guest go to great lengths stating the hypothesis has not been investigated. But of course most viewers will ignore that part and the hypothesis will stick in memory. The researcher clearly is trying to garner support for funding a detailed investigation. No wonder he's cherry-picking the data that sounds most alarming. Why would you compare 10 weeks after Fukushima to 5 weeks before, instead of the same calendar dates in the previous years. And why comparing absolute numbers rather than infant deaths per 1000 live births (about 6.7 average in the US). The absolute numbers are about 75 vs expected 50 out of about 7500 births (estimate based on the 6.7 per mil figure) in Philadelphia in ten weeks. Nationwide there should be about 825 000 births during that period, and an estimated 5 527 infant deaths. A 2.2% increase amounts to about 120 additional deaths. It would be good to see absolute and relative numbers in previous years to see fluctuations and trends. Will autopsies unanimously clarify if an infant death can be attributed to elevated radiation? Any US medics reading this, and willing to share their knowledge? I have no clue whether autopsies are routinely performed after infant deaths (I would guess so), but I doubt committed dose is assessed without severe indications. 12 babies per week may be statistical fluctuations, but they may be true cases that remain unattributed. I know that's a polemic rant, but so are the 'deaths per gigawatthours' graphs. I'd vote aye for investigation, but I'd first ask Mr. Mengano(spelling?) for more objective figures (which he must be able to produce if he knows how to cherry-pick). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manarak Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 by the grace bestowed upon me, hahahaha ROFLMAO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elcent Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 (edited) Besides all that, what about this? AP IMPACT: Three-quarters of US nuke sites have had tritium leaks, often into groundwater By Associated Press, Published: June 21 BRACEVILLE, Ill. Radioactive tritium has leaked from three-quarters of U.S. commercial nuclear power sites, often into groundwater from corroded, buried piping, an Associated Press investigation shows. The number and severity of the leaks has been escalating, even as federal regulators extend the licenses of more and more reactors across the nation. for more http://www.washingto...KDdH_story.html Edited June 22, 2011 by elcent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lomatopo Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Looks like there may be some problems at the Fort Calhoun Nuclear Power Plant near Omaha, Nebraska in the U.S.A. as a result of record flooding of the Missouri river. Lots of rumors including an FAA-mandated no fly zone. Warning from a few months ago... http://www.ketv.com/r/27392766/detail.html Current situation... http://iowaindependent.com/57641/flood-waters-surrounding-nebraska-nuke-plants-concerning-but-not-yet-critical Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elcent Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 (edited) what about Nikola Tesla? FREE ENERGY!!! FOR ALL ... isn't it time to awaken his invention? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DaxD_4n3KMg Edited June 25, 2011 by Scott misquote edited out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maidu Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 Thanks for the Tesla link. I'd heard of him, but the segment had some interesting added nuggets of info. It does add perspective to the energy policies up to today (and beyond?), which have vested interests and big business controlling too many important decisions. In other words, energy policies are not guided by things like "what's most efficient, what's safest, what's cheapest or cleanest" ......instead, energy policies are largely guided by what resources and transmission grids can be controlled - in order to generate as much revenue as possible for the vested interests. Those are major reasons why fossil fuels and nuclear and coal, have been dominant. That's why a country like Thailand has no incentives for regular people to provide some or all of their own power, and Thailand has zero options for regular people to lessen their electric bills by selling home-grown power back to the grid. What is Thailand doing to encourage methanol production on village scale? Nothing. What is Thailand doing (any research?) to enable farmers to grow hemp for generating heat and electricity? Nothing. Hemp produces twice the biomass of trees per rai, and can grow strong on marginal dry land. What is Thai gov't doing to encourage less wasteful use of electricity or conservation in general? Nothing. As we speak billions of lights are shining unnecessarily, and hundreds of thousands of air.con units are churning unnecessarily throughout Thailand. What's the Thai gov't response? Either a big yawning 'mai pen rai' or, if you talk to EGAT managers: "Let's build four to six nuke plants along Thailand's coasts!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsetBkk Posted June 25, 2011 Share Posted June 25, 2011 (edited) *(Edited out)* Meanwhile, back to the UK - good news: New UK nuclear plant sites named Common sense prevailing against all the scaremongering. Edited June 25, 2011 by Scott misquote edited out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted June 25, 2011 Share Posted June 25, 2011 A number of posts with a quote attributed to the wrong person have been edited. Please take care in quoting others. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elcent Posted June 25, 2011 Share Posted June 25, 2011 *(Edited out)* Meanwhile, back to the UK - good news: New UK nuclear plant sites named Common sense prevailing against all the scaremongering. why would they need power plants at all. They have outsourced everything together with the Americans in the Anglo-American power house, lol. I bet it will never happen, - for more than one reason. Otherwise goog luck with Stuxnet and other ill intentioned saboteurs. I know of one guy in Germany who tamed Tesla's free energy system and built it for his house. He even get paid for excess energy that is not used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elcent Posted June 25, 2011 Share Posted June 25, 2011 Resumption of decontamination system not in sight The operator of the troubled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant has still not resumed operations of a system to decontaminate highly radioactive water. http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/25_18.html ... and here below an attempt to cool a meltdown/melt through ... TEPCO unable to gauge No.2 reactor water level The operator of the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant says it still cannot obtain accurate data on the water level and pressure of the Number 2 reactor. It says a provisional measuring device installed earlier this week is not operating properly. Tokyo Electric Power Company believes that readings by the original device are incorrect due to damage suffered in the March disaster. http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/25_08.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siampolee Posted June 25, 2011 Share Posted June 25, 2011 Contrary to popular belief and rumour does this situation regarding drugs actually tell us that radiation is harmful? that would seem to be at odds with the supporters of nuclear energy and both its safety and cleanliness. Perchance if the older residents of Hiroshima and Nagasaki opinions were canvassed we might well have a clearer picture regarding the affect of atomic fallout from peaceful or warlike sources. Green is clean? As may be. However when describing atomic energy as a green energy source that is indeed something of a misnomer. When that cork pops out of the fissionable material bottle the devil incarnate stalks the affected areas and its people. That delightful perambulating practice is in place for many years and many generations of innocent victims too. Japan and indeed its people are indeed it would seem the unfortunate testing ground regarding the dubious delights of fissionable power production along with the affects of war damage due to fissionable products. When will we ever learn that playing with fire is dangerous ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elcent Posted June 25, 2011 Share Posted June 25, 2011 (edited) Contrary to popular belief and rumour does this situation regarding drugs actually tell us that radiation is harmful? that would seem to be at odds with the supporters of nuclear energy and both its safety and cleanliness. Perchance if the older residents of Hiroshima and Nagasaki opinions were canvassed we might well have a clearer picture regarding the affect of atomic fallout from peaceful or warlike sources. Green is clean? As may be. However when describing atomic energy as a green energy source that is indeed something of a misnomer. When that cork pops out of the fissionable material bottle the devil incarnate stalks the affected areas and its people. That delightful perambulating practice is in place for many years and many generations of innocent victims too. Japan and indeed its people are indeed it would seem the unfortunate testing ground regarding the dubious delights of fissionable power production along with the affects of war damage due to fissionable products. When will we ever learn that playing with fire is dangerous ? good post, thanks. Edison and the now GE, which has a big stake in nuclear power plant plans for TH, electroluted an Elephant to hinder progress and lost. This alone will get people here into gear against it. Also, Tesla warned over hundred years ago that fossile use for power is wrong and dangerous. I am certain that his remarkable genious concept will be looked at deeper now and on a worldwide scale. Countries that build nuclear power plants now or continue that are like building their own nuclear bomb for themselves, paying for it and then get sabotaged by artificial desasters and stuxnet virus etc.. Edited June 25, 2011 by elcent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maidu Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 *(Edited out)* Meanwhile, back to the UK - good news: New UK nuclear plant sites named Common sense prevailing against all the scaremongering. The English have a history of innovations, particularly regarding cutting edge mechanics and such. I'm unpleasantly surprised that they (or their powers that be) gave agreed to additional Nuke power plants. I, for one, predicted in writing what calamities could happen if nuclear power plants were allowed to be built. I don't like to say "I told you so...." - but I may wind up saying that, if one or more British nuke plants have serious problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puschl Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 I know of one guy in Germany who tamed Tesla's free energy system and built it for his house. He even get paid for excess energy that is not used. I don't believe in a perpetuum mobile until I see one. But maybe I should be more courageous and rent a jet ski. Or are you saying he's drawing energy at the expense of the nearest broadcast transmitter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronz28 Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 Omah Nebraska nuke flooded but they say mai pen rai.... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/26/fort-calhoun-flooding-nuclear-plant-nebraska_n_884773.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Organicpete Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 I don't believe in a perpetuum mobile until I see one.... neither did Tesla... He wasn't making energy just transducing what is already here. Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronz28 Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 (edited) Lesson learned too late= dry site complex mandatory at nuclear power plants... Edited June 26, 2011 by ronz28 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elcent Posted June 27, 2011 Share Posted June 27, 2011 I don't believe in a perpetuum mobile until I see one.... neither did Tesla... He wasn't making energy just transducing what is already here. Pete exactly! I read a great interview of him, over 20 pages. I think it was from the Tesla society network. I'd hope that this event gets broadcasted worldwide to create awarness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts