Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Sure, I guess I agree (Score 3) 261

I consider myself a refugee from the one party state of Mass. Vermont now. Still one party, but there are more trees. Plus, a bonus, a soul still exists here in old school Vermonters, not so different from old school everywhere.

Kerry strikes me as a mediocre man. Splashed on to the scene as a impressive, whistle blowing, honest Veteran. People cared, they listened. Rewareded as Senator for life in Mass. Since then? What? Where does that experience apply?

Now this? Homeland security, TSA, info gobbling, more spy agencies than even the most ardent activist can name is correct? This is the right side of history? This man is not even a second rank intellect. He is not a serious man.

As an aside, this seems to be the hiring standard, and fatal flaw of the current admin. It explains the choice of Biden. "Dewd, that was like two years ago" on a network news program? Where did they find that asshole? Mediocrity seems to be what gets them the job. No threat to make the President look bad, in comparison. Is this the explanation?

I am open to opposing views.

Does anyone have an argument/evidence that proves me wrong? Kerry is a third rate intellect, a second rate man.

Comment Re:France: 75% of electricity from nuclear (Score 1) 288

The wise answer is neither, thank you.

Asking the nuke industry to address its longstanding issues is not a pro coal argument. Coal's issues are not an answer to nuke problems.

So the argument is a dodge, a distraction from another reality. Threat level? Different time zones, orders of magnitude difference, an utterly laughable comparison. Playing with nuclear gadgets has resulted in the world abandoning areas the size of Delaware and three or four Rhode Islands combined, now no-go zones. Nuclear toys have created a waste more deadly than anything in nature, capable of killing all biota for hundreds of thousands of years. No comparison at all is possible.

Oh but look at all the dead people who have died. We may work that out. Why do we die? It is the way. I point to this, drinking killed the man. He was run over by a beer truck.

To answer the presented impressive numbers graphs and Power Point Presentations there is also this and that serious, statistical and scientifically based analysis that Chernobyl killed a million. Nuke fans insist that is FUD. Coal fans do the same, because the problem? Neither is provable. Both are probable. Probably. Beware of beer trucks.

Coal mining vs Uranium mining? An unattractive couple, no photos at that wedding please. Which one threatens unborn children, 26,587 years from now? We have a winner.

Open question one. Should EPA change standards on safe levels of radioactivity? Begin by accepting science that says there is no no safe level. Proceed to the calculation of acceptable rates of excess deaths. How many will we kill?

EPA uses Maximum Contaminant Levels, 70 years of consumption, one in a million die.

FDAs single dose Derived Intervention Level standard accepts two extra cancer fatalities in 10,000.

How many folks are aware FDA numbers are orders of magnitude beyond EPA? Let's have a discussion on that, shall we? Good idea. Done!

Environmental Standards for Uranium Fuel Cycle Facilities: Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) http://www.epa.gov/radiation/l...

Comments are due June 4, 2014.

It is an open question what happened at Fuku 3. Perhaps someone or something can get in there by 2025 or so and have a look around. In the meantime, radioactivity flows to the sea. How much? Trace amounts already on the US West coast, but neither FDA nor EPA are bothering to measure.

The effort to radioactivitate (sick) the Pacific Ocean is a work in progress. I would have voted to not do that. (Nukes require on the order of a million gallons per minute to cool).

Three of the current problems gifted to us by the the Safe, Reliable and Green Nuclear Industry to our largest body of water are Bioaccumulation, Hot Particles, and clumping. Big fish eat little fish, collect the stuff. Hot particles are bits of the fuel that somehow became shot all about, and clumping is the tendency of this nuke waste to gather together. It is not evenly distributed in the water, as cream in coffee.

We are all players in the World Championship Nuclear Lottery. You probably will not consume that many hot particles. Probably, long odds on that. But they get better, the chance of Winning over time increases as radiation continues to flow to the sea.

The Master Strategists, or World Class Assholes (my view) at TEPCO have recently said, err, we don't think we can stop this, any of you folks have any ideas? That only took them three years to figure out.

Marcelo, you should fight these idiots, that is your necessary, good fight. They are to blame for this. The nuke industry should be screaming, lining up to lynch them, to get them the heck out of there, yesterday. Instead they cower together, ignore the problem, lie, and point the finger at others. NIMBYS and BANANAS and COAL and GLOBAL WARMING. Business as usual. I am not impressed.

Chernobyl was arguably the worst design of anything in the history of the world, but the Soviets moved. 500,000 plus people involved, got it done. Gorbachev insists the costs are what broke the Soviet Union. But they got it done. The nuke Industry's current bleeding wound is Fukushima.

Pointing the finger at someone, something else, calling names? Playground tactics of children. Children who now insist on more of the same. No. And until you behave properly, no new toys. We may yet decide to take the ones you have.

Comment Re:France: 75% of electricity from nuclear (Score 1) 288

Many choose to ignore anything that contradicts preconceived ideas, "accepted thinking, "settled science". TEPCO was certain a tsunami was no threat. They were told about it repeatedly. Arrogance and hubris from men that are accustomed to being the smartest man in the room. This is the fatal flaw. Not the technology. The people.

Transuranics were spread far and wide. How? A very serious question. I do not take it lightly, nor listen to fool's rant. Measures of Xenon gas isotopes would decisively prove/disprove this theory due to a half life measured in hours. That information has not been released. Why?

Arnie Gundersen is no ranting, stoned hippy. He was a gung-ho Nuke industry pro, a true believer. B.A. Nuclear Engineering Cum laud from the serious and respected Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (1971) . Master's degree in nuclear engineering thanks to a prestigious Atomic Energy Commission Fellowship (1972). 40 plus years nuclear power engineering experience, holds nuclear safety patent, licensed reactor operator, former nuclear industry senior vice president, managed and coordinated projects at 70-nuclear power plants in the US.

There is nothing of a lightweight in the man.

Arnie found radioactivity in an office safe.(IIRC) Well, how could that happen, he properly asked, and insisted on an answer. He was fired. Became a whistleblower, they tried to destroy him. He ended up broke, but not broken, and now "out of the priesthood". He dedicated his life to increased safety. His approach is cool, calm, fact based, science. After Fukushima he decided there are no safe Nukes. Because, People.40 good years, and one very bad day. The risks are not manageable over the long term. Odds are, something is going to break. The proof is in the results.

Here, many links about finding fuel bits http://www.zerohedge.com/contr...

google of prompt criticality Fukushima https://www.google.com/#q=prom....

The google search does not yield a scientific rebuttal of his argument. Nor have you attempted to rebut the argument. Nor evidently even bothered to watch the vid? Here is the link, again http://vimeo.com/22865967

Fukushima is permanently abandoned. You say the risks are over stated. Was the evacuation an error? Inside the buildings, levels are so high that machines cannot function. Men must enter this dangerous place, risk their lives for other's mistakes, for the next 40 years. Is this an acceptable risk?

The entire industry is threatened, Germany is shutting down. 5 closed last year in the US, another 8 plans canceled. Why? They have themselves to blame. The men in the industry did not listen, called it FUD, scaremongering. They did not act, repeatedly ignored warnings, repeatedly dodged safety issues. Now Japan has 50 reactors turned off. Very expensive rusting junk.

Now here in the US, a move to lower safety standards?

To the question? Fukushima is permanently abandoned. You say the risks are over stated. Was the evacuation an error?

Marcelo, I did not manage to find links to Mr Stansbury? If he has written about this, I am interested. Thanks. And Thanks for the good discussion. These are serious issues, of great consequence.

Comment Re:France: 75% of electricity from nuclear (Score 1) 288

You are answering questions I do not ask. Fukushima has GE MK I BWRs. Spent fuel pools on the fifth floor, under no containment.

Plus once a reactor is shutdown, prompt criticality is impossible. Perhaps on Gen I reactors (all retired for at least 25 years now), but not even on any of Fukushima reactors.

This is the official position, NRC. Proof of concept was in the Borax experiments, years ago. The criticality was in the fuel pool. Not the reactor. The reactors just melted. Harmlessly, except the building is cracked, and ground water is flowing through.

Pumps down after station blackout. No coolant flow. Workers tried to access it, run water, valves did not function. Systems likely broken by earthquake. 3 levels of earthquake resistant gear, descending in toughness as one moved away from the reactor. The stuff thought to not be that important is what gave up. (NHK Documentary) Water boiled off, exposing the spent fuel rods. Hydrogen went boom, as in the others, in less than an instant, Zoom. Black mushroom cloud of volatilized spent fuel.

Check it out. If it is BS, it should be easy to debunk. So far, noone has. Instead, they call him names, say, oh well, he is a denier sort of thing. Really. Arnie's Vid http://vimeo.com/22865967

Comment Re:France: 75% of electricity from nuclear (Score 1) 288

A Chernobyl like accident has a chance of happening again like one in a million.

Probabilistic Risk assessment. I love that stuff. Lets call it one in a billion. Give each employee one opportunity to completely screw up per day...

435 nukes x 10 years x 365 days x 600 employees equals...

A Billion!

So based on my billion wild ass guess, and three generally bullshit things I multipled together I came up with what? The Bullshit that there should be an accident every 10 years. Well, that turns out to be actually true, but nevemind that. The problem is, some hungover idiot is going to put a forklift through it.

So, should Japan not evacuate Fukushima? Should Putin start a Discount Homestead act for Chernobyl?

Comment Re:France: 75% of electricity from nuclear (Score 1) 288

Arnie makes a point to say the prompt criticality was not a nuclear explosion. A Criticality. Watch the vid. I have not seen, nor heard a coherent rebuttal. http://vimeo.com/22865967

Cancer? A useless argument. Who can really say what causes this or that? It is a booming cause of death since 1950. Why? Who knows? Twinkies? Coca cola, that and steak sandwiches. Alexey V. Yablokov 2006 book, says a million died from Chernobyl. Jay M. Gould , Benjamin A. Goldman did an "Excess death study". Claim 40,000 US deaths after Chernobyl.

I do not know the truth about this. But the difference of opinion, the different numbers from this scientist and that could not be more stark. Maybe one is correct maybe this other. How do we know? i have given up on that.

Hang out at Lake Karachay for one hour. Die. At some point, we all agree, it is possible for this stuff to kill. All agree. There is an amount that is too much.

It is Not Acceptable to have to abandon New York City. No amount of coal or fossil fuel or natural gas, or low fat artificially flavored strawberry yogurt poses this level of threat.

That is my bottom line.

Comment Re:I started with a Humanities Degree (Score 2) 264

This is it. Well stated. The problem today is young people are being taught what to think, not how to think. Mr Shakes his spear and Chaucer are negated for sexual and race politics.

Say this and that, these are the acceptable opinions. Shout down and attack those who dare to disagree.

So of course, they have no respect. Their wise elders fill them with bullshit, that they are expected to repeat. They know this. It is time for them to speak out about this.

Comment Re:France: 75% of electricity from nuclear (Score 1) 288

I will check it out. Good work there. The difference between what folks say is striking. This one says Chernobyl killed 60 or so, that one, a million. We are blessed to have all this information, this great tool, our struggle is to know what is true.

1986, word leaked out about Chernobyl. They were lying, trying to cover it up. Weatherman on TV talked about the passing air, the clouds, it is there, in the clouds, in the air over my head. He advised, if it rained, do not go outside.

It rained. Radoiactive rain. That was my moment of decision on the matter.

Chernobyl, Fukushima are an unacceptable. Leave your home with the clothes on your back, never return. Then, as soon as possible, get rid of the clothing. Tech can only be as good as the people. Repeatedly, the industry folds safety concerns for economic reasons, Japan and here. They lie. Japan lied, is still lying. There are three people I trust on the matter, Arnie Gunderson, Bob Alvarez and Dave Lockbaum. I should note that none of those three trusts them either. Listen to them, listen to their words, their arguments.

Gunderson called every aspect of Fukushima from the first month. Contradicting all the official, and expert statements at the time. Meltdowns, containment lost, radioactivity from groundwater to the sea. Tepco over their head, a management firm, not engineers. Spent fuel found all around. The amount of radioactivity far higher than stated.

And, that unit three was a prompt criticality. Yup. Black mushroom cloud, volatilized fuel. The world has not caught up with that, yet. NRC says it never happened, can't happen. I would be interested to hear your input. http://vimeo.com/22865967

The United States, due to the cold war escapade, our gift for spending Ten Trillion dollars, Ten Million Million dollars, for that we have an area the size of Delaware and Rhode Island combined, reeking with the stuff. Crap from the Manhattan Project is still a problem. They do not take care of business, they do not get it done. Then, they lie. There are virtually no variations from this.

Alvin Weinberg, a notable exception, a great and good man. Yanosuke Hirai of the Onagawa NPP. Closer to the quake center, a larger tsunami, instead of folks having to flee in terror, it became a sanctuary from the cold. MR Hirai is credited with that. He is described as a stern, old school man who was not to be contradicted. Alas, there seem to be few like those two great and good men.

It would be significantly better if it all of this stuff actually was not that dangerous. But, as should be clear by now, I do not trust them, it is too convenient. I immediately reject it as an effort to legislate the problem away. Hey, nobody can prove they got cancer from it, right? Japan has raised the "safe" level, cut off payments to folks and said, Okay, move back home now.

I am not neutral in the matter, I do not trust them. I am listening. But I will be damned, going forward? It will Not be business as usual. Past performance forces me to no other position than to say to the industry, to advocates, prove it. Get it done. Deal honestly with the existing issues, then talk to me about more, better newer, whatever. But until then? The answer is a definitive and unqualified No.

Marcelo, it is good to speak with you, my name is Jimmy. You keep at it, be one that listens to both sides, because both have serious people, worthy of our attention.

Later.

Comment Re:France: 75% of electricity from nuclear (Score 1) 288

EPA is currently soliciting public comment on a potential change. www.regulations.gov under Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2013–0689.

Environmental Standards for Uranium Fuel Cycle Facilities: Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) http://www.epa.gov/radiation/l...

EPA establishes certain generally applicable environmental standards to protect human health and the environment from radioactive materials. Issued in 1977, “Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for Nuclear Power Operations” (40 CFR 190) limit the radiation releases and doses to the public from the normal operations of nuclear power plants and other uranium fuel cycle facilities—the facilities involved in the manufacture and use of uranium fuel for generating electrical power.

mac, you are a student in this field, IIRC? What do the folks from within that circle think? Who has run the numbers on this, where did the "40%" come from? Thanks.

Comment Re:France: 75% of electricity from nuclear (Score 1) 288

France's large nuclear program goes back to 1973, Middle East BS, the "oil shock." Most of its electricity came from oil burners. They had a choice of being dependent on foreign oil, or nuclear. Decommissioning costs are an issue there, too. Brennellis is at 20X estimates, still going. Over the next ten years 22 of France's 58 reactors will turn 40. Funding is insufficient, as here.

The problems are different, but all involve dollars. France politically could maybe pull off rate increases, but in the current US environment? Trouble. Not just NIMBYs wielding BANANAS. Closed five last year for economic reasons, canceled another 8. Natural gas is killing them. So much oil is being shipped from Canada, Detroit has cars sitting and waiting for available trains. Nukes need 600 people to run a plant, others get by with 100. They are stuck with large inventories of spent fuel, resisting the move to cask storage, as they are well aware stashing it "temporarily" in the parking lot will become the defacto storage solution. There is no place to put it. There are zero dollars in private money for new stuff, which start at 10 billion, and 10 years before a payback.

Exelon's Nuclear Matters lobby org has just drafted Carol Browner to hellp legislate the thing back in their favor. Efforts include getting rid of solar and wind subsidies, getting themselves considered as "renewable" (New York) and pushing to receive some sort of credit for being "reliable". The effort to squash renewables will likely cause some conflicts their "green" selling point.

In this environment, nobody wants to talk about pre-existing troublesome expenses.

Comment Re:Does it make me a bad person... (Score 1) 293

No, we cannot stop determined individuals. This is a key part of what I am saying. We can never get this %100 security. But what we now have is an effort to have %100 knowledge and control. I am dead set against all of it. So instead of trying to remove every threat, remove all risk and in the process become what we thought we were fighting...

I do not know how specifically it could be done, but we got beat because planes got grabbed, and nobody knew. The US was ready to shoot down commercial jets. We did not know what was in the sky, who was flying, what was up. Literally. Now we still don't. It should have been the first priority to close that hole. Some means of real time ID and location of the planes, and who is flying them. The military must have something like this already?

We limit the freedoms of the airlines to the extent that we are going to know who you are, where you are, and where you are going. Everyone else goes along as before. Instead? We are under this secretive microscope, everything they have will be used against us. We have effectively suspended the rule of law, all of us routinely searched and inspected, probable cause, the need for warrants out the window. This big brother virus, born from stupid, feeds on this idea that we can control it, if we just have some more information. It is the road to hell. We are fast becoming what we swore to fight, in the previous 10 trillion dollar cold war escapade.

And we still have no real time data on the planes in the sky. It is upside down. Going to take a lot of work to turn it back. Unfortunately, It will take obvious abuses I think to get the momentum to do it. Unless we decide to vote for someone who promises to find the crap, and unplug it.

Comment Re:Does it make me a bad person... (Score 1) 293

It is not about the 250 lost, though that is significant enough. I am ticked over the emotional over reacting and incoherence that lead to Iraq, Afghanistan, Homeland Security, TSA, sacrificing civil rights, sacrificing privacy, militarizing the police, endless drone strikes, dramatically changing the character of this country.

Instead of getting a proper handle on the one thing that was the source of the problem, we have expanded to this fiasco of trying to control and know everything, everywhere, and are now enmeshed in an endless war.

Cost? We have paid, and will continue to pay orders of magnitude beyond what it would have been required to know precisely what is in the sky, where, and who is flying it. Control, knowledge that we still do not have.

Not acceptable

Comment Re:Does it make me a bad person... (Score 1) 293

9/11 was only a couple of airplanes.

Turns out 406 Mhz distress radiobeacon ELT's can have GPS built-in. Also "In addition to standard ACARS messages, airlines can install a system sold by Boeing called Airplane Health Management which provides real-time troubleshooting and allows Boeing to monitor the flight as well as the airline."

The situation is not acceptable. Especially in light of two trillion spent on the WoT, the swatification of every department of this government, the abandonnment of civil rights, vacuuming up of data, the treatment of folks at airports, drone strikes on wedding celebrations?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D... http://www.boeing.com/boeing/c...

Slashdot Top Deals

Advertising is the rattling of a stick inside a swill bucket. -- George Orwell

Working...