Skip to main content

tmi1

I'm writing to mark 35 years since the average American became aware of the term "Meltdown" as it applies to the Safe, Clean, Too Cheap to Meter sneaky transfer of plutonium production technology to the for-profit public utility sector following WWII. I didn't find the information I was looking for in Wikipedia, specific to where the reactor had been shipped back in the 1990s after the corium was sliced and diced and sent off to Idaho. I recall they shipped it to Hanford, which would make an ironic historical marker for a currently gnarly situation there, which I'll note toward the end of this missive.

TMI2 was the first public meltdown of a big commercial reactor, occurring at the very height of the good old Cold War when fairly regular meltdowns at SuperSecret government facilities weren't reported on the nightly news. So it's not really surprising that no truthful accounts of what went wrong at TMI2 were ever forthcoming from the paranoid government that spawned and so richly subsidized these scaled-up monstrosities. Of the 100+ commercial reactor plants built, more than 90 remain in operation in the U.S. all these years later. Most have been gifted with 20-year operating license extensions by the NRC to ensure continued profitability to utilities that only recently finished paying off the capital costs originally incurred. It's all gravy from here.

Until they break and/or melt down and/or explode, as more than one or two of them inevitably will before those 20 years is up and if the grid doesn't fail (and melt all of 'em at once). Amazingly, all these decades later there is still no place to put thousands of tons' worth of gnarly spent fuel waste either, so it stays in overcrowded spent fuel pools on-site, either 100 feet up in the air at BWRs, or in-ground next to containments at PWRs. Given current problems at the only long-term high-level waste burial site in the country - the Waste Isolation Pilot Project [WIPP] near Carlsbad, New Mexico - it's unlikely there will be any secure waste storage facility in the foreseeable future. As hundreds of tons more high-level waste continues to be produced every year.

Having been part of an on-site investigative team arriving at TMI2 on April 1, 1979, I could point out a dozen lies in Wiki's TMI2 account, but there's really no point. Those lies are enshrined in not just one but two major governmental investigation reports - one from a "Blue Ribbon Commission," the other from the NRC itself. Both of which reached their false 'conclusions' - a.k.a. cover story - about the accident years before it was finally admitted there had been an actual meltdown, or that there were huge hydrogen explosions at TMI2 just like there were at Fukushima Daiichi. TMI2's containment structure being far more substantial than the piddly-assed known-to-be-weak containments at Daiichi, we just didn't get the spectacular video footage of exploded nuke in March of 1979 like we did the 4 exploded nukes in March of 2011. Or even the exploded nuke of April of 1986 if you want to count Chernobyl.

Radiation  managed to get out anyway, of course. As it does daily even during the 'normal' operation of these Beasts. Because it's never actually 'contained' in the first place. The people of south-central Pennsylvania have been living - and dying - with TMI2's load of belched crap ever since.

Gnarly News from Hanford

Over the past 9 days more than 17 workers at Hanford have been sickened by what have been characterized as "toxic fumes" from an underground nuclear storage tank. This is one of 177 underground nuclear storage tanks at the reservation, many known to be leaking to produce a plume of radiochemical sludge moving toward the Columbia River, containing at least 56 million gallons of liquid waste left over from weapons production from 1943 to 1989.

Meanwhile, CDC and EPA investigations of a "cluster" of severe birth defects in a 3-county area just outside the Hanford reservation boundary have purportedly not yet determined any cause for the rash of babies born over the past three years with missing brains and/or skulls, serious neural tube defects and spina bifida, even as the number of new cases continues to rise. Both state and federal officials are being closed-mouthed, refusing to inform media or public of the actual numbers ("dozens" has been floated) while pretending they cannot see any suspicious connections with the known plume of contaminated wastes spreading underground from Hanford. Despite the fact that Hanford has been dubbed "the most contaminated area in the Western Hemisphere."

So. Here we are 35 years later, and things are getting worse by the day. How much longer will it be before we finally end this insanity? How many more must die, or never get a chance at life? How much money are we willing to pay for suffering and early death for ourselves and our progeny, as our civilization literally drowns in its own filth and petty indulgences?

Oh. And then there's this bit of cognitively dissonant bullshit offered in an era of plutarchy-imposed austerity as they busily "liquidate" the homes, labor, sustenance and support of the masses to line their own pockets. As if there were no tomorrow and he who dies with the most loot (and blood on his hands) "wins" whatever evil race they're running. Oy.

If. If we could banish the black Beast back to the Hell that spawned it, who knows what other things we could do to make this world a better place to leave our children than the world our parents left to us? We are the lucky ones - we were not only spared the instantaneous mass extinction promised to us all our lives by TPTB with their MAD stockpiles, we were born with brains. If we'd only learn use them, we could... We could.

Happy Anniversary, Earthlings. Don't eat the sushi.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Here's a picture (25+ / 0-)

    of what Anniversary Eve was like here at the 'stead. It's like some kind of echo in time. Spring comes with some definitely challenging issues every year. Just to remind us not to forget, I guess...

    nightfire

    There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

    by Joieau on Thu Mar 27, 2014 at 09:04:58 PM PDT

  •  Couple of quibbles... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    native

    ...first, the chestnut "too cheap to meter" was what one bigshot at the Atomic Energy Commission used to describe nuclear fusion, once it had been attained successfully. The name of the gentleman escapes me at the moment.

    Second, the spent fuel was supposed to be recycled, but fears about proliferation, and the general incompetence of the civilian commercial reactor business conspired to create laws that restricted that. I suspect we have plent of fuel for the remaining reactors, and maybe a few, never-to-be-built ones, locked up in cooling pools and dry casks around the continental United States.

    Float like a manhole cover, sting like a sash weight! Clean Coal Is A Clinker!

    by JeffW on Thu Mar 27, 2014 at 09:25:33 PM PDT

    •  In my Catholic grammar school they (11+ / 0-)

      brought in a film projector every few weeks, pulled down the shades and showed industry -- different industries' -- p.r. films. One of them was about how the peaceful atom would one day produce electricity 'too cheap to meter.' There were tv commercials to that effect to. It isn't like the guy said it, and it wasn't picked up and pushed on the public over and over and over, both at home and at school. Even in the news and public affairs programming of the day.

      The 'it goes away if we recycle' tale is false in that the waste can be reused only so many times, and then you are left with a smaller pile of even more radioactive waste. The US alone had generated some 70,000 metric tonnes by 2011 or so, a quick google says. That's commercial plants, and the US only.

      Expressed in pounds, that would be about 150,000,000 pounds, of stuff who's toxicity to life is usually discussed in ounces, grams, and fractions of grams. From the US alone.

      So what? cut that down to 50,000,000 pounds after the recycling. 30,000,000?

      Recycle all you'd want, you've still got a massive, and unmanageable, waste problem.

      Of course, the industry, world wide from the mining through the pushing the crap into the environment, ranges from naive, to gullible, to delusional, and to criminal. Was it 17 plants the Russians dumped in the water? for example. Plus the waste. France dumping waste in the Channel and the Mediterranean and off Somalia. Etc etc etc.

      Certainly we can be sure the corruption is less among the Chinese and Indians.

      This is commercial reactors we're talking about so far (maybe not the Russian's). Not military, or government, or research, which boosts the amount of waste stupendously.

      Simply ain't no way to make the waste problem go away, outside of moving all life off of earth.


      Real fixes, outside the coffin fixes, ain't ever pragmatic says DC Bubble Conventional Wisdoom.

      by Jim P on Thu Mar 27, 2014 at 10:31:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  There's a slow but thoughtful documentary, (5+ / 0-)

        Into Eternity, about the surreal lengths to which Finland is going to secure their nuclear waste, deep in bedrock and volume-backfilled with concrete. And, even then, there's no guarantee at all that it'll stay secure for the 100,000 years it will take to become inert.

        Government and laws are the agreement we all make to secure everyone's freedom.

        by Simplify on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 12:52:59 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, well.. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        JeffW
        The 'it goes away if we recycle' tale is false in that the waste can be reused only so many times, and then you are left with a smaller pile of even more radioactive waste. The US alone had generated some 70,000 metric tonnes by 2011 or so, a quick google says. That's commercial plants, and the US only.
        The vast majority of it is U-238. (If I remember my study right, it was on the order of 95% of spent waste.) Alpha emitter, half-life on the order of a billion years. It's essentially non-radioactive. That's where reprocessing comes in. It removes the U-238, vastly decreasing the volume and mass of the spent fuel. You then vitrify the waste and render it chemically inert enough to store in barrels.

        The bad stuff is the Te-99, which is about 1% of the waste;  I-131, which is even less; Cs-137, also less than Te; and Sr-90, also less than 1%. The U-238, on the other hand, is practically harmless unless aerosolized and inhaled (or otherwise ingested through chemical means) - but these are problems with the chemistry, not the radiation. That's the point of the vitrification - to render it chemically inert and insoluble to water so it doesn't seep into the environment.

        Isn't this place supposed to be a reality-based community?

        Simply ain't no way to make the waste problem go away, outside of moving all life off of earth.
        Radioactive material doesn't grow legs and walk out of a mountain.

        TX-17 (Bill Flores-R), TX Sen-14 (Kirk Watson-D), TX HD-50 (Celia Israel-D). Senate ratings map (as of 3/10/14)

        by Le Champignon on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 06:25:48 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  A "reality-based" community (7+ / 0-)

          would recognize the pie in the sky fantasy you're trying to sell for the scam that it is. There is a very good reason we don't reprocess commercial waste in this country, and we will never reprocess commercial waste in this country again. Jimmy Carter, who ended the practice because HE knew what was going on (being an apt student of Hyman Rickover and having attended not one or two but three meltdowns in his time), was the first and only POTUS we ever had who understood clearly the dangers of this technology and all the technologies attached at the hip to it.

          Why not try to sell us fusion instead? They've got a nifty new - and outrageously expensive - showpiece out in California that looks a lot like a big old football stadium where they zap a teeny tiny less-than bullet sized 'vial' of tritium with the most powerful lasers on the planet, hoping one of these days to accomplish... something. Anything at all. Doesn't look very hopeful, but the toys are darned impressive!

          Kinetic energies. Gravity. We don't have to boil water to generate electricity, you know. We especially don't have to boil water by smashing atoms. That's some serious overkill, but that's the nature of the beast. Always was, always will be.

          There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

          by Joieau on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 06:57:55 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  points (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            chimene

            You get points for knowing who Rickover is, and that Carter went through Navy nuclear training.

            But presidents do all sorts of things for various reasons.  

            You'd think Obama would understand Constitutional law, you know?

        •  Um. There's easily 200,000 tonnes of waste (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Joieau, Sandino

          to this moment, (it'll double and triple in the next years) and nobody's getting rid of it. They've got it in piles here and piles there.

          It doesn't have to walk anywhere. Nature Herself, yea! even onto the rocks, does things to move it around, and any scheme you might come up with in fantasy will be trumped by the reality that the shit -- in the real world of real people and real money and real resources that we actually live in -- isn't being disposed of, and nobody is finding a that can guarantee our great-great-great grandchildren won't get screwed by it.

          Tell you what: now that the oceans are rising, instead of fantasy fixes for waste, come up with the soon-needed plan to move the 16 US plants sitting on the coasts, and their cores, to someplace they won't be sitting underwater.


          Real fixes, outside the coffin fixes, ain't ever pragmatic says DC Bubble Conventional Wisdoom.

          by Jim P on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 09:50:30 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Amen, Jim. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Jim P, Sandino

            But... but for those antiquated rustbuckets threatened by sea level rise, I guess you haven't heard about The Plan yet. Dikes, just like in Holland, and a whole lot of little blonde boys in wooden clogs to plug the holes with their fingers. §;o)

            There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

            by Joieau on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 10:13:50 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  The criminal incompetence (6+ / 0-)

      of the corporate class gifted with billions to play with and technological toys complex enough to stroke the hugest of wannabe sciencey egos was and remains entirely predictable by anyone with two brain cells to rub together.

      And I noted that these SuperSized beasties melting and exploding were not exactly a surprise to anybody, since the experimental and isotope production reactors in every country that had them had been melting and exploding on a regular basis all along. It's not like they didn't know the technology was inherently dangerous and fatally flawed. They scaled it on up for profit anyway. Because they could... i.e., nobody stopped them.

      There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

      by Joieau on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 06:40:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Lewis Lichtenstein Strauss, AEC chairman (6+ / 0-)

      http://en.wikipedia.org/...

      "Our children will enjoy in their homes electrical energy too cheap to meter... It is not too much to expect that our children will know of great periodic regional famines in the world only as matters of history, will travel effortlessly over the seas and under them and through the air with a minimum of danger and at great speeds, and will experience a lifespan far longer than ours, as disease yields and man comes to understand what causes him to age."
      http://en.wikipedia.org/...

      I'm a Vietnam Era vet. I'm also an Erma Bombeck Era vet. When cussing me out and calling me names please indicate which vet you would like to respond to your world changing thoughts.

      by Just Bob on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 07:03:40 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The subsidies for nukes were immense (6+ / 0-)

    Our federal government went all in on nukes, supplying them with an endless stream of cash. They even provided them with a lobbying group and called it a regulatory body - NRC.

    It's ironic that many nuke supporters that don't want the plants closed, are the same people that bemoan federal subsidies for solar. While the worst thing that solar companies produced was a shoddy product that lost in the market place to better/less costly designs, failed nukes are another story.

    We will be doing nuke clean ups for generations to come. Plant failures, the science of statistics tells us, are when-not-if events. If we focused our efforts on short term power storage, we would solve our need for clean, reliable, abundant energy.

    -7.5 -7.28, Jesus was a socialist

    by Blueslide on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 05:23:11 AM PDT

  •  Before you diss plutonium production.. (2+ / 3-)
    Recommended by:
    Ozy, Lenny Flank
    Hidden by:
    Sandino, wilderness voice, chmood

    I kinda need it for any spacecraft I send beyond Jupiter. Thanks.

    Also:

    The people of south-central Pennsylvania have been living - and dying - with TMI2's load of belched crap ever since.
    There's a thing called science, and CT is not permitted here.

    TX-17 (Bill Flores-R), TX Sen-14 (Kirk Watson-D), TX HD-50 (Celia Israel-D). Senate ratings map (as of 3/10/14)

    by Le Champignon on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 06:11:42 AM PDT

    •  I don't think you really want to (5+ / 0-)

      try this dirty trick on me. Not only will it not work, you might get your itchy fingers burnt to a crisp.

      There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

      by Joieau on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 07:00:43 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  And for the record... (5+ / 0-)

      Many people were harmed by radiation releases from TMI2. Met-Ed/GPU and their insurer ended up paying out tens of millions of dollars in settlements to people who developed cancer or birthed children with serious birth defects and/or chromosomal anomalies.

      The two cover story 'investigations' came up with several not so clever way to diminish the health effects. First, they knocked off some exponential zeroes from their estimate of iodine releases - 4 zeroes in the TATF backgrounders when they arbitrarily "lost" 150,000 curies simply by rounding down the Bettis release-to-coolant figure of 7.65 million curies to an easy 7.5 million curies. Then they knocked off all the remaining zeroes by attributing hundreds of times more effectiveness to the charcoal filtration system than it actually provided, to present the patently ridiculous figure of 15-17 curies total released iodine.

      The filters, just so you know, were completely saturated within 15 minutes of the start of the accident, and provided zero filtration of iodine from that point forward until they were changed out.

      Then Kemeny/NRC creatively drew a circle around the plant on a map, with a 50-mile radius. The size of the circle is itself highly suspect from the git-go, given that 10 miles is the farthest out any nuke evacuation plans ever projected, even for meltdowns. They chose 50 miles so they could include about 2 million people in the count who were never exposed to what came out of TMI2 and traveled with the prevailing wind to the north/northeast. This was 'mansplained' by the supposed experts by deliberately obfuscating the considerable difference between point-source radiation (diminishes with distance via the inverse square law) and a plume of radioactive isotopes that travels just like smoke and fallout plumes from nuclear testing.

      So they had all these people who lived anywhere within the 100-mile diameter circle, divvied up those 15 erstwhile curies of iodine evenly amongst them, and decided that nobody could have been exposed to enough to cause any harm. What amazes me most is that nobody called 'em on it. Dastardly indeed. The proudly self-styled braniac pro-nukes even here at DKos were swearing right up until the first Daiichi plant blew sky high that "radiation DOES NOT move in plumes." Almost as if they believed it or something, more than two decades after Chernobyl!

      Steve Wing, et al. did a proper epidemiological survey in the early '90s. At long last. They simply obtained the statistics relevant to known radiological health hazards in the actual population surrounding the plant. At 3, 5, 10, 15 and 20 miles. Then marked those on a map per where those people were when TMI2 melted down and for a period of years after. What came of that was a very nice graphic plotting of the plume. Which of course could not be admitted in court because TPTB still insisted that "radiation DOES NOT move in plumes."

      There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

      by Joieau on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 08:51:02 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  thank you (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        unfangus, Sandino, Joieau, dharmasyd

        for definitively debunking the TMI BS

        •  You're welcome, wilderness. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          dharmasyd, Sandino, wilderness voice

          Nukes of any variety of course know about contamination, which is essentially particulate in nature and behaves just like bomb plumes or smoke from a forest fire (but far less heavy, apart from actual fuel particles). This is such a no-brainer that anyone with a lick of sense should know it as a matter of simple logic.

          The point source canard counts only gamma and neutron radiation too, but even if 'shine' were the issue (there was some during the meltdown) neither Kemeny nor Rogovin actually applied the inverse square rule to the people they'd drawn into their dose estimate population. The person living exactly 49.9 miles from TMI was assigned exactly the same allotted amount of those fictional 15 curies as the person living across the street from the plant gate. So the methodology is fallacious even on its own asserted merits!

          Besides, NRC and EPA had helicopter crews busily mapping the plume from the air every 15 minutes during the first week, then every 30 minutes thereafter. Recovery workers got plume maps twice daily. Why on earth would anyone bother to spend good money on helicopters equipped with GMs and TLDs to map plumes if what was coming out of TMI2 wasn't moving in plumes? Absurd.

          There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

          by Joieau on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 09:59:53 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  uprated to counter improper HRs (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Le Champignon, mamooth

      CT is indeed not permitted here, and too many of my fellow anti-nuclears indeed do indulge in silly CT kookery. It doesn't help us.

      PS--one research reactor can provide all the Pu-238 we'd need for any foreseeable spacecraft for the next few centuries.

      In the end, reality always wins.

      by Lenny Flank on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 01:12:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  WIPP update (4+ / 0-)

    Next week the first team will go underground to investigate the leak.

    They've determined the cause of the truck fire. It seems if you stop washing the trucks, don't use nonflammable hydraulic fluid, and don't maintain the trucks, you may end up with an accumulation of flammable material on the catalytic converter. It will take a while. They stopped washing the trucks in 2004.

    http://www.currentargus.com/...

    I'm a Vietnam Era vet. I'm also an Erma Bombeck Era vet. When cussing me out and calling me names please indicate which vet you would like to respond to your world changing thoughts.

    by Just Bob on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 07:19:43 AM PDT

    •  LOL!!! (4+ / 0-)

      Now all they need to do is come up with a plausible cover story for the actinide releases. Although I must admit that I did really like the forklift driving ghost. Sort of romanic and legendary, n'est ce pas?

      There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

      by Joieau on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 07:52:09 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  oh you know, global warming, yaddah, yaddah. (0+ / 0-)

    Conflating Hanford and TMI doesn't make any sense at all-- Hanford was a cold war era site for building nuclear bombs, and was apparently run with a very dirty "There's a War On" mentality.

    I realize this is probably a waste of breath, but: perfection isn't needed for nuclear power to be worth using.  All that it has to be is cleaner than the competition, and some of the competition is famously dirty, e.g. coal (which we're still using for 40% of US electrical power, despite some minor worries about global warming).

    •  Not playing the false dichotomy (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ZhenRen, Sandino

      game today, sorry. But you can write a nice anniversary diary of your own if you like, and tell us all why even after TMI2 and Chernobyl and Daiichi and the ~70 years' worth of broken promises to "figure out something... someday" to do with all that deadly-for-millennia waste, nukes are our saviors. I'm sure some here might read it and agree.

      There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

      by Joieau on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 10:20:25 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Real choices, not false dichotomies (0+ / 0-)

        70s anti-nuclear movement => more coal burning, no question.

        Present day anti-nuclear movement => ?

        Back in the 70s they liked to talk solar a lot too.  

        I'm a "do everything" kind of guy myself.

        The nuclear waste problem is a good one to have, you get to decide where you put it.  Coal waste, no such luck.

        Once again: it doesn't have to be perfect to be worth doing.

        •  If you're a "do everything"... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Joieau, Sandino

          ...kinda guy, how about doing what is mandated by evolution with the unleashing of nuclear:

          "With the splitting of the atom, everything changed except man's way of thinking."  Einstein  (quote not exactly accurate, but the essence in maintained) ---

          So how about changing our way of thinking.  Human consciousness needs to change.  The greedy, short sighted, competitive spirit of capitalism does not work with a nuclear world.  

          The dangers of neclear need to be understood, appreciated, and respected.

          We cannot rush items onto the market before proper testing is done in order to get MY product out there before the other guy.

          With nuclear, we cannot cut corners in order to save money.

          And, if we go forward with nuclear, we must do what we should have done decades ago--develop a real solution for the waste.

          To be able to live in a nuclear world, our consciousness must evolve beyond the selfish, me-first, cut corners attitude of capitalism.

          Have a good day doomvox, and try this one!

          "The only thing needed for evil to succeed is for good people to do nothing." Hannah Arendt

          by dharmasyd on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 12:43:42 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  social factors matter, for sure (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            dharmasyd, mamooth

            I'm not sure quite what you're getting at with this "evolution of consciousness" stuff but pretty clearly doing stuff safely depends as much on social factors as technical...

            http://thebulletin.org/...

            "And, if we go forward with nuclear, we must do what we should have done decades ago--develop a real solution for the waste.'

            For anti-nuke people to keep harping on this is a bit like burning someone's house down and arresting them for vagrancy.  

            The good solutions keep hitting political paralysis, induced by the anti-nuke folks, so things keep getting done half-assed instead.

            •  um, no (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Sandino, Joieau

              It's not the anti-nuke folks who killed nuclear energy---it's the electric companies, by not ordering any more.

              When  Duke recently cancelled its two new planned nukes, it wasn't because Greenpeace was picketing their office, or because Sierra Club was suing them, or because Earth First! was monkey-wrenching their trucks.  It was because the price tag had tripled in just a few years, and they hadn't even stuck a shovel into the ground yet.

              It is money, pure and simple money, that killed nukes.

              You are, I am afraid, bitching at the wrong people. It's not OUR fault that electric companies aren't ordering new nukes. (shrug)

              so things keep getting done half-assed instead
              Speaking of "things getting done half-assed", why don't you tell us the story of Progress Energy and the Crystal River nuclear plant--the one where Progress decided to update their nuke, and to save themselves a few bucks, they used a process to open the containment building that was different than the standard method--and broke their containment building. Then lied about it. Then wanted taxpayers to pay to fix it for them.

              THEN we can talk about "things getting done half-assed".

              In the end, reality always wins.

              by Lenny Flank on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 04:04:59 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  ps--the nuke companies can stop people from (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              dharmasyd, Sandino, Joieau
              For anti-nuke people to keep harping on this
              . . . "harping on this" by, ya know, designing, building, and paying for a safe place to store the waste. Instead of oft-promised but never-delivered vaporware.

              In the end, reality always wins.

              by Lenny Flank on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 04:08:04 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  True. It is obvious... (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Joieau, Sandino

              ...you don't know "what you're [I'm] getting at with this "evolution of consciousness" ...

              Maybe someday you/we will.,  In the meantime, I will continue working for the safe use of energy sources so we won't omnicide ourselves before we can travel into space.

              "The only thing needed for evil to succeed is for good people to do nothing." Hannah Arendt

              by dharmasyd on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 06:48:05 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  nuclear has no lower carbon footprint than (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sandino, Joieau

      renewables does. It's not the silver bullet against global warming that you seem to think it is.  (shrug) Meanwhile, the price of renewables keeps going down, and the price of nuclear keeps going up.

      PS--"nukes" and "coal" are not the only binary choices.

      In the end, reality always wins.

      by Lenny Flank on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 01:06:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I lived near Three Mile Island in 1979 (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Joieau, Sandino

    and have been anti-nuke ever since. I've been arrested several times over the years at anti-nuke rallies, and worked for Greenpeace and the Sierra Club.

    Of all the problems with nukes back in the 80's--everything from waste storage to weapons proliferation--none of them have been solved yet. And even in this age of global warming, nukes are not the silver bullet some would have us believe they are--nukes have no lower carbon footprint than renewables do.

    Of course I wish the anti-nuclear movement could claim the credit for the death of nuclear power in the 80's and its moribund status ever since, but alas we cannot. It was pure economics that killed nukes in the US.  They were supposed to be cheap cheap cheap, but instead turned out to be expensive expensive expensive--before Duke Energy recently axed its plans for two new nukes in Florida, the price had already tripled and they hadn't even stuck a shovel into the ground yet. Nukes simply can't compete economically. Only a handful of new nukes are actually being ordered today, and it's a pretty good bet that, like Duke's planned-then-cancelled nukes, virtually none of them will ever actually be built.

    (PS--although there are plenty of reasons to oppose nukes, I have sadly found over the years that some of the arguments made by my fellow anti-nukers are simply silly CT nonsense and demonstrate a lack of basic science understanding--things like "whales are fleeing to California to escape the Fukushima radiation!". I try to correct these bogus arguments whenever I can, since they do nothing at all to help us.)

    In the end, reality always wins.

    by Lenny Flank on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 10:16:56 AM PDT

    •  They may be dead in the US, (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Joieau

      but they're not dead in India, or Japan, or god knows where else.

      •  world nuclear power output declined 7% in 2012 (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Sandino

        on top of a 4% decline in 2011.

        It's dying everywhere.

        The places where it still thrives are places where the entire industry is government-owned and the costs don't matter.

        In the end, reality always wins.

        by Lenny Flank on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 01:01:40 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  And silly CT nonsense sometimes (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Joieau, Sandino

      turns out to be stone cold fact.

      •  on occasion it may. most of the time, though, it (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mamooth

        just makes us all look like tinfoil-hat lunatics who flunked fourth-grade science.  (shrug)

        In the end, reality always wins.

        by Lenny Flank on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 01:02:52 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Just as often, (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Sandino, Joieau

          the term is used a a thought-stopping epithet.

          •  fortunately, data trumps (0+ / 0-)

            Present some data, and no thought gets stopped.

            In the end, reality always wins.

            by Lenny Flank on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 01:40:18 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I am curious about (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Sandino

              what it is you see as "conspiracy theory" about this diary. Or is that just a general toss-off aimed at disarming likely skepticism?

              There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

              by Joieau on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 04:59:00 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  (sigh) here we go again . . . . . . . (0+ / 0-)

                Read my first comment.

                Then read it again.

                And read it once more if you still don't grock.

                (sigh)

                In the end, reality always wins.

                by Lenny Flank on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 05:04:07 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Your first comment (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Sandino

                  is here. It says...

                  • CT is indeed not permitted here, and
                  • too many of [your] fellow anti-nukers indeed do indulge in silly CT kookery.
                  • It doesn't help us.

                  With a post script about Pu238 production for spacecraft, obviously not directed at me or this diary. I fully concur with your take on what 'killed' nukes in this country, and I expect every pro-nuke worth a mind-dime understands why nukes are not the answer to our energy or pollution issues. Anyone who considers themselves exceptionally bright (as most pro-nukes do) wouldn't seriously blame the hippies for their favorite technology's serious technological shortcomings or its political unpopularity. Not even GE 'believes-in' nukes anymore.

                  I was just wondering about the CT thing. From Le Champignon it's dismissible as a throw-away. You, however, have mentioned it in three separate posts to three separate people. It's a fair question, don't you think (without needing to sigh)?

                  There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

                  by Joieau on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 05:55:19 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Um . . . . . (0+ / 0-)

                    I'm on your side.  

                    I didn't say a fucking word about your diary.

                    So take a deep breath and calm yourself.

                    Geeeeeez.

                    In the end, reality always wins.

                    by Lenny Flank on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 06:01:43 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Oh, I'm perfectly fine. (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Sandino

                      Just wondered, thought I'd ask. Since this diary's been off the list for hours and all, nobody's watching.

                      Meanwhile, the fire burned itself out on the mountainside just after midnight. Which is good, sometimes they go for days, we get the locals, the state and feds. Jumpers, P-3s, bladder-choppers and a couple of spotters. Mostly leaf and dead fall plus some small saplings that needed to be thinned. It's actually good for the forest if it doesn't get hot enough to take out the older trees. This time next month it'll be vibrantly green.

                      Not even smoke today, been raining since daybreak and scheduled to continue through Sunday. Might warm up next week enough to plant out potatoes, peas, leeks and beets. Ducks are laying again after their late winter break, fried rice for dinner tonight - it was tasty. Life is good. You seem a little uptight, though.

                      There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

                      by Joieau on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 06:32:22 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  ps-- i was referring to my first comment in this (0+ / 0-)

                    thread:

                    I lived near Three Mile Island in 1979
                    and have been anti-nuke ever since. I've been arrested several times over the years at anti-nuke rallies, and worked for Greenpeace and the Sierra Club.

                    Of all the problems with nukes back in the 80's--everything from waste storage to weapons proliferation--none of them have been solved yet. And even in this age of global warming, nukes are not the silver bullet some would have us believe they are--nukes have no lower carbon footprint than renewables do.

                    Of course I wish the anti-nuclear movement could claim the credit for the death of nuclear power in the 80's and its moribund status ever since, but alas we cannot. It was pure economics that killed nukes in the US.  They were supposed to be cheap cheap cheap, but instead turned out to be expensive expensive expensive--before Duke Energy recently axed its plans for two new nukes in Florida, the price had already tripled and they hadn't even stuck a shovel into the ground yet. Nukes simply can't compete economically. Only a handful of new nukes are actually being ordered today, and it's a pretty good bet that, like Duke's planned-then-cancelled nukes, virtually none of them will ever actually be built.

                    (PS--although there are plenty of reasons to oppose nukes, I have sadly found over the years that some of the arguments made by my fellow anti-nukers are simply silly CT nonsense and demonstrate a lack of basic science understanding--things like "whales are fleeing to California to escape the Fukushima radiation!". I try to correct these bogus arguments whenever I can, since they do nothing at all to help us.)

                    In the end, reality always wins.

                    by Lenny Flank on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 06:04:04 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Ah, so. (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Sandino

                      I've been known to correct misconceptions when I see them asserted, and outright falsehoods whenever those make an appearance. But apart from misconceptions and outright lies (from one 'side' or the other), I don't care why people stand where they've chosen to stand. Welcome all anti-nukes who care enough to make the effort to understand what they're talking about, and all who simply stand and say very little.

                      On the other hand, pro-nukes may or may not have valid reasons or pertinent technical knowledge. Doesn't matter to me whether or not they understand why their advocacy hasn't, isn't and won't work to change the actual situation. Nukes are dead, they'll all be happier when they accept it. Or keep their angst if they want. No skin off my teeth.

                      I get my 'trons from Duke. They are not my favorite folks. Hope to install solar and microhydro before the year turns. But know how that goes, so not emotionally invested in that timeline.

                      There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

                      by Joieau on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 06:59:16 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  likewise (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        mamooth
                        Welcome all anti-nukes who care enough to make the effort to understand what they're talking about, and all who simply stand and say very little.
                        But when people on our side make arguments that are simply factually and scientifically wrong (such as "the whales are fleeing to California to escape the radiation from Fukushima!") or silly CT nuttery (such as "the nuke industry controls all the science journals!"), all it does is make EVERYONE on our side look like anti-science dolts who flunked fourth grade science, and hands the nuke industry a big club to beat us all over the head with.

                        Such arguments do not help us--they HURT us. We should not make them. And we should not coddle those who do make them. Wrong is wrong, no matter which side it comes from. Period.

                        In the end, reality always wins.

                        by Lenny Flank on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 07:16:35 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Meh. I don't think (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Sandino, chmood

                          Great Unwashed Masses are paying enough attention to care one way or the other 'why' anybody arguing on either side of this issue feels the way they do. The pro-nukes obviously think all they have to do is shut up the hippies and everything will be hunky dorey for them, but they are misguided. Across the board.

                          People pretty much know where they stand when it starts directly affecting them. They can do that via their guts or their brains, I don't care which and I doubt most other people care either. I believe civilization - the many, not the few - are done with nukes. I don't believe there's any argument a nuke could make that would change that one iota. That's what they get for grabbing the tail of the tiger that's been threatening not just our civilization but our entire species' very existence for well more than half a century now. Hell, the kids don't even hear the noise being made, it's SO over.

                          It would be nice if something could kick it into overdrive, hopefully before the next TMI2, Chernobyl, or Daiichi. But sadly, I doubt it will. My point with this diary is that if we know it's SO over, we need to finish the job. ASAP. I for one don't have another 35 years to wait and see, but I also know that what will be will be. The younger generations can't blame the nuclear state of their world on me. That's all that really counts. To me.

                          There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

                          by Joieau on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 07:50:32 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                    •  By the way, (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Sandino

                      nobody knows why the whales have congregated off the west coast in such numbers and diversity. Including a couple of species so rarely seen that people suspected they might be extinct. Nobody knows why the starfish disintegrated to produce a layer of bottom-slime nobody'd want to swim in. And 'everybody knows' it's Big Pharma that owns the scientific journals! [That's a joke, son].

                      People can content themselves with not knowing, or they can (and will, per their human nature) make connections that may or may not factor into the situation they're concerned about. Big shrug. What bothers me far more are the deliberate deceptions that get spread for the purpose of making people look dumb. But those simply need correction, some links to more reliable data and a reminder that nobody really knows.

                      "EVERYONE on our side" is a broad brush generalization that doesn't have any merit here, in this or any other of my diaries to the subject of nukes. You are the one who brought this, given Le Champignon's one-liner dismissibility. It seems to be, from what I've seen of your posts, something you take rather personally. Because I don't see that anyone's concern about what's happening to the Pacific is anything deserving of ridicule. Nor do I see anti-nuclear sentiment in general to be deserving of ridicule, for whatever reason the sentiment is held.

                      It's kind of like you're ashamed to be associated. Or you've become used to debating the merits/shortcomings of the technology by means of pre-emptive apology for your position. I see no good reason for that, even when dealing with actual nukes. And I've done quite a bit of that over the years. Just so you know.

                      There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

                      by Joieau on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 08:38:48 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  mammals cannot sense radiation (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        mamooth

                        Unless they are carrying geiger counters with them.

                        The simplest reason why there are more whales in the annual migration this year (and of course most Americans are too stupid to even know that the whales migrate every year) is also the best for us----conservation efforts are working, and there are more whales now than there used to be.

                        Yes, I am ashamed to be associated with some of the people on my side.  To some of us, truth still matters.  And when people on my side make silly arguments like that which are simply untrue, it embarrasses me, as well as making us all look like fools.

                        There are plenty of good reasons to oppose nukes. We don't need to make stupid shit up.

                        In the end, reality always wins.

                        by Lenny Flank on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 08:49:52 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Now, now. Chill a bit, m'kay? (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Sandino

                          Many would claim mammals (and/or any other clade) can't sense pheromones either, given positively homeopathic concentrations in a goven volume of medium. Being a synesthete from a long line of synesthetes, I have had occasion to dismiss more than one erstwhile 'expert' making absolute pronouncements about what can and cannot be perceived. Besides, given cetacean breeding and gestation facts as well as recorded mortality among calves, I'm not impressed by your brush-off. Even though I am glad we're not killing as many (directly and on purpose) as we used to. Killing them with the same kind of filth we're killing ourselves with is... merely unfortunate. For them.

                          I would suggest that if you are ashamed to be associated with people who stand with you on any issue, for the sole reason that you believe they're too stupid to be seen with in public, you might ought to choose some different issues on which to take a stand. Far be it from me to embarrass you with my shameful knowledge of nuclear technology and meltdowns, or with my choices in life and lifestyle that might sully you by proximity to hippie Luddite sort of stuff.

                          But I will say that your attitude doesn't strike me as very helpful. You said that already, didn't you? So I'll just wish you good night. The anniversary is over now.

                          There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

                          by Joieau on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 09:11:58 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  mammals cannot sense radiation. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            mamooth

                            It is precisely this kind of silly woo-woo baloney, that embarrasses me.

                            PS your knowledge of nuclear technology and meltdowns should have already taught you that mammals can't sense radiation. Pity you don't know any biology.

                            But since talking to woo-woo's is generally pointless, I'll not any further.  I'll just continue to point out that the woo-woo is idiotic, and avoid being lumped together with the woo-woo's.

                            In the end, reality always wins.

                            by Lenny Flank on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 09:17:29 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Whales don't read DailyKos (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Joieau

                            Repeating your strawman is working well. You have managed, using only ignorance, to demonstrate that there is no possible connection between anomalous whale behavior and the unprecedented poisoning of the ocean.

                          •  and you have managed to show our opponents once (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            mamooth

                            more that far too many of us don't understand fifth grade biology.

                            (sigh)

                            In the end, reality always wins.

                            by Lenny Flank on Sat Mar 29, 2014 at 05:13:15 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  ps--about those whales (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            mamooth
                            Besides, given cetacean breeding and gestation facts as well as recorded mortality among calves, I'm not impressed by your brush-off.
                            Given the fact that you are not a cetacean biologist, I will dismiss your uninformed opinion.  Being an expert in nuclear technology does not make you an expert in everything.

                            But let's ask those who ARE actually experts in cetacean biology:

                            http://www.sciencedaily.com/...

                            http://www.livescience.com/...

                            http://swfsc.noaa.gov/...

                            http://seagrant.uaf.edu/...

                            Wait, wait--let me guess-----they are all part of the nuclear industry conspiracy too, right?

                            (sigh)

                            And now I suppose we'll get to hear your expert opinion as a cetacean biologist why everyone else is wrong about this, huh . . . . . . .

                            In the end, reality always wins.

                            by Lenny Flank on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 09:32:36 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Ad hominem argument. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Sandino

                            Also a violation of the not-quite DKos "rules." I know it can be frustrating not to be able to find the fight you're looking for, but them's the breaks. Take it elsewhere.

                            There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

                            by Joieau on Sat Mar 29, 2014 at 10:21:55 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  you were wrong. wrong. W-R-O-N-G. wrong. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            mamooth

                            Just admit it and move on.  It won't fucking kill you.  Honest, it won't.

                            Geez.

                            In the end, reality always wins.

                            by Lenny Flank on Sat Mar 29, 2014 at 10:26:42 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                        •  Again by the way, (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Sandino

                          I never claimed that mammals can sense radioactivity. Nor have I seen anyone else here claim that mammals can sense radioactivity. Yet another distractive straw man.

                          There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

                          by Joieau on Sat Mar 29, 2014 at 10:17:10 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

  •  Nuclear power and nuclear weapons (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ZhenRen, Joieau, Sandino

    were birthed together, like Siamese twins. It's difficult, if not impossible to separate them. As nuclear power generation proliferates, so will nuclear weapons, sooner or later. Are we not seeing this happening already?

    The poisons will migrate, like depleted uranium, far from their source. Eventually. Even now they are spreading, from Carlsbad, from Hanford, from Daiichi. Even if they could theoretically be contained, they will not be contained.

    Preferring nuclear energy to coal energy is like preferring strychnine to cyanide.

  •  Confirmed (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Joieau, Sandino

    A scientist at a DOE lab involved in the government response confirmed that a coverup had been orchestrated at TMI. Actually, NRC's own website confirms that.

    The official NRC story claims radiation levels were trivially above background levels. But, that is based on an average of sampling and monitoring data across the entire geographic area. An average level is meaningless as a measure of public health impacts because radioactive particles do not deposit themselves evenly over the countryside. Accumulations may vary greatly from block to the next, depending on changing wind directions and the shadow effect of buildings.

    Even after a release has stopped, radioactive particles stay on the move, being redistributed by wind, water and passing cars. If one happens to live in a "hot spot" where radioactivity levels are high, it doesn't matter what the average level is.

    And, unlike background radiation coming from space and bedrock, radioactive particles released by a nuclear reactor may become inhaled and embedded in lung tissue, where they can do much more harm than external radiation. The NRC and its federal partners know all of that. Their official guidance for radiological assessments makes no provision for an average radiation level across an entire area.

    There's simply no reason for the NRC to issue a statement like that except to knowingly mislead the public about radiation's dangers; not just at TMI but everywhere else that a release might occur.

    •  Correctamundo, DH. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sandino

      People who care to pay attention are wising up to the scam, and they're not very happy about it. We get oceanographers telling us one day that there's zero danger from Fuku isotopes in the pacific (and claiming things like cesium don't bioaccumulate), then begging us the next day for funding so they can "keep track" of what they've already informed us is harmless. It really is quite dizzying if you're someone prone to credibility for data/analysis.

      The rest don't care enough to pay attention, don't want any details. A majority of those don't want a nuke in their neighborhood, though. Or a nuclear waste dump. That all works out in favor of alternatives. Which is where we've got to go, so that's fine.

      I think sometimes the prideful sciencey wannabes just don't see the same appeal in renewables as they see for the Beast's insular fraternity (generally avoided by working scientists in other fields) and its intriguing shroud of alchemical secrecy. Some people just want to belong to a 'club' of some sort, seek the like-minded. Story of civilizational fits and starts since forever.

      There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

      by Joieau on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 07:32:21 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  a correction must be made here . . . (0+ / 0-)
      And, unlike background radiation coming from space and bedrock, radioactive particles released by a nuclear reactor may become inhaled and embedded in lung tissue, where they can do much more harm than external radiation.
      Radon, a decay product of natural uranium and thorium in bedrock, is a gas, and is also inhaled into the lungs. And in areas such as enclosed basements, radon levels can accumulate and be far higher than background. That is what makes radon so dangerous.

      But your point about "average exposures" is entirely valid.

      In the end, reality always wins.

      by Lenny Flank on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 09:24:16 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Of course when you inhale a noble gas (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Joieau

        you subsequently exhale it. It isn't a particle that lodges in your tissues to provide repeated high-intensity assaults on a specific cluster of cells, nor does it go into solution and get carried to your organs and generally take up residence in living systems. In this sense the comparison with exposure to basement radon is somewhat spurious.

        •  this is all nonsense (0+ / 0-)

          Do some basic research about "radon".

          (sigh)

          In the end, reality always wins.

          by Lenny Flank on Sat Mar 29, 2014 at 05:12:06 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  sigh (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Joieau

            more vacuous slags when you're exposed. I don't suppose you have a more specific criticism of my points.

            •  sigh (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              mamooth

              Do some basic research on radon.

              PS--"exposed" as WHAT? I've been anti-nuke since before you were pooping your diapers.

              But TRUTH and FACTS still matter to some of us. Wrong is wrong, and wrong should be corrected even when it comes from our side--ESPECIALLY when it comes from our side.

              And you are wrong. As basic research into radon will show you.

              Sorry if you don't like being told you are wrong.  It won't kill you, I promise.

              In the end, reality always wins.

              by Lenny Flank on Sat Mar 29, 2014 at 06:31:17 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  you haven't said what was wrong (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Joieau

                You continue to 'argue' with only insults.

              •  LOL!!! (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Sandino

                Man, your audible wheezing is becoming irritating. Don't you have an inhaler?

                Your penchant for picking fights in dead threads is also irritating, as well as against what passes for not-quite "rules" on this website. Given that I am not in the habit of tossing HRs - especially invalid ones also frowned upon by those not-quite "rules" - all I can do is log my complaint about your transparent attempt to distract by making yourself and your [badly] feigned 'superiority' the focus. All the while tossing CT this and CT that and dissing those who stand against nuclear technology - the only rational stance there is on this issue - claiming personal embarrassment caused by the boogey-man scarecrow [a.k.a. straw man] you introduced here and applied to "EVERYONE on our (sic) side."

                I do not find your attitude or your oft-asserted intellectual superiority to be helpful to the effort I have been engaged in since you were in short pants. So please keep it out of my diaries in the future. Thanks.

                P.S. It's not the radon itself that causes 20,000 lung cancer deaths per year [ACS], it's radon's short-lived daughters [electrically charged] that do attach themselves to minute dust particles and lodge in the lungs. Still, the data does highlight the very important FACT that "Natural Background Radiation" is not as harmless as so many pro-nukers like to claim. And this certainly belies the constant efforts of 'officials' engaged in covering up the threats posed by the gnarly situations at WIPP and Hanford to claim that transuranic alpha, beta and gamma emitters (+ ugly daughters) are as harmless as "Natural Background Radiation."

                There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

                by Joieau on Sat Mar 29, 2014 at 10:08:40 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  apparently, some people are too dumb to tell who (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  mamooth

                  is on their side and who is not.

                  and dissing those who stand against nuclear technology
                  Umm,  I am against nuclear technology, you dunderhead.

                  What I am dissing are people who make factually untrue idiotic arguments, like "the whales are fleeing to California to escape the Fukushima radiation !!!!!" Or "bedrock radiation doesn't get inhaled into the lungs".

                  Those arguments are wrong.  Period.  We look like idiots when we make them.  So don't make them.

                  your oft-asserted intellectual superiority
                  Says the self-proclaimed whale biology expert . . . . . . . who was utterly wrong.

                  Too funny.

                  Still, the data does highlight the very important FACT that "Natural Background Radiation" is not as harmless as so many pro-nukers like to claim. And this certainly belies the constant efforts of 'officials' engaged in covering up the threats posed by the gnarly situations at WIPP and Hanford to claim that transuranic alpha, beta and gamma emitters (+ ugly daughters) are as harmless as "Natural Background Radiation."
                  No shit.  Or, as I just said, "But your point about 'average exposures' is entirely valid."

                  You don't actually read any of my comments, do you. Or are you just picking a fight because I told you that you were wrong about something, and now your panties are in a knot. (sigh)

                  In the end, reality always wins.

                  by Lenny Flank on Sat Mar 29, 2014 at 10:23:30 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  More ad hominems? Yawn. (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Sandino, patbahn

                    Once again, I don't care that you claim to be on my "side," or why. I am not impressed by spurious appeals to your own un-evidenced 'authority', and I have clearly stated that I don't find your fallacious, confrontational arguments to be helpful. You are being a dick in my diary. The only reason you'd still be here dead-threading is to get some kind of trolling thrills (rule-breaker 'points'). I am not playing your game, request yet again that you go play it elsewhere.

                    To any who may have arrived late or are still here - Don't feed this troll. Thanks.

                    There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

                    by Joieau on Sat Mar 29, 2014 at 11:19:45 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  and now we come to the Ray Pensador play----- (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      mamooth

                      "I'm always right, so anyone who disagrees with me is a paid shill for the enemy--so don't talk to him".

                      Too funny.

                      You learned well--but apparently you didn't read all the way to the end of the book . . . .

                      (snicker)

                      In the end, reality always wins.

                      by Lenny Flank on Sat Mar 29, 2014 at 11:42:44 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                •  The Unwind on this silliness. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Sandino

                  Lenny's snickering cannot change his magical scarecrow [straw man argument] into anything other than it is. I have asserted nothing in the entirety of his dead-threading campaign about which I could be "right" or care whether he "disagrees" per my right-ness. I still haven't even figured out what the hell he's been going on about that I HAVE said.

                  I did mention that the "never seen before" (per news reports from the areas) congregation of sea life - including mammals - along the west coast from Alaska to southern California may not be a simple reflection of increased numbers from a few years' not-quite moratorium on wholesale slaughter, because average whale gestation periods range at between 10 and 18 months, most births are singular, dependence upon lactation ranges from 6 months to 2+ years, and the range for reaching sexual maturity is anywhere from 5 to 20 years. Oh... and the rather high infant mortality rate too, and unfortunately.

                  IOW, whales don't reproduce fast enough to account for this kind of unprecedented showing, and even that doesn't address the rare deep-sea species that are part of that unprecedented showing. There are a number of possibilities for causation - including complex causation - in something like this. I asserted not a single one of them. Because nobody knows (which I also said, very clearly). All I did was mention that the actual reproductive rate of whales makes HIS causal assertion less than sufficient. Because it's less than sufficient.

                  Mr. Flank has projected his own argumentative shortcomings onto me, then has descended straight to ad hominem personal insult because... um, because... that is his habit/'style' and/or purpose here? Hell if I know. Looks like a poser to me.

                  There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

                  by Joieau on Sat Mar 29, 2014 at 02:52:45 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

  •  these racs had 25 year design life, extended to 40 (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Joieau, Sandino

    now 60.

    The Factor of safety for design was typically 2.5

    so assuming the plants were built perfectly,

    the maximum life would be 62.5

    now in reality it's much less and that's why we are seeing
    so much trouble.

    A reactor built in 1970 is 43.  That's really old.

    The Pressure vessels are all hitting hight transition temps
    so once that transition temp rises past 212, the damn thing will shatter like an egg if it has a plumbing leak or fire in there.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site