Support NeoGAF

[Gaborn]

In geological time, that earthquake was routine.

In geological time humanity has existed for a negligible time.

 

[speculawyer]

So you're arguing that the licenses should be cheaper. Understood. Although "extremely expensive" is such a general term I'd be curious of your source.



in the first place, I have to say, I love that turn of phrase "the potential fall-out from an accident is so great..." could be trying to convey "the potential COST in the EVENT of a fall out..." or "the potential FOR an event is so great..." or even both! Wonderful. Simply wonderful. 5 stars on the wording. The risk nuclear power poses is still extremely minimal and fatalities from nuclear disasters (chernobyl aside, and even then it was more negligence in the response of the government than anything) are extremely minimal. Coal is more dangerous.

Third, the reason a nuclear plant hasn't been built in 30 years is the fear mongering after the 3 mile island incident which, and most anti-nuclear activists leave this out, resulted in no fatalities, no injuries, and no adverse health effects. Fear can be a powerful thing, just ask South Koreans about fan death.





I'm pro-science, there is no reason to have an irrational fear of nuclear power any more than I should support South Korean superstitions about fan death.




A wonderfully bland phrase that says everything and means nothing. I agree! I think we should EXPAND our nuclear power as France has done personally though.

So a bunch of silly nit-picking and not a single mention of the real problem . . . the fact that the market has turned its back on the issue. Pathetic.

And I'm sorry to hear that democracy is such a nuisance . . . I didn't realize that being authoritarian and for subsidies were Libertarian principles. LOL.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

And that is why nuclear power cannot be safe. Humans run the damn thing, and greed, profits, ignorance, and shoving problems under the rug will cause other Fukushimas and Chernobyls to happen.

How many people have died fom Fukushima?

Last I checked it was zero.

 

[Branduil]

Still less radiation than coal plants are pumping into our air every day.

Oh wait, I can see the smoke from the coal plant, so that means its safe!




It'd be extremely safe if we were actually able to replace all those ancient reactors. Everyone will gladly let coal plants be rebuilt as technology catches up, meanwhile we're running the equivalent of nuclear Model-Ts.

There was an administrative issue at Fukishima, but the plant was also 40 years old and hit by a double whammy of an earthquake and tsunami wave. It is now contained. Chernobyl was a reactor type that nobody sane uses, and was a worst of worst case scenario.

Pinning nuclear safety on this ancient and special case makes about as much sense as saying nobody should drive a car because someone's 1972 Cadillac burst into fire after being hit yesterday by a pickup truck.

The unfortunate irony is that the well-intentioned campaigning against building new nuclear reactors actually results in us just using less-safe old reactors.

 

[Buddha Beam]

I was in Fukushima yesterday! Great sushi! Everything is A-OK!

Better check your nuts for lumps, chief.

Also, make sure they haven't become sentient. Otherwise, they might start singing opera tunes.

 

[Gaborn]

So a bunch of silly nit-picking and not a single mention of the real problem . . . the fact that the market has turned its back on the issue. Pathetic.

And I'm sorry to hear that democracy is such a nuisance . . . I didn't realize that being authoritarian and for subsidies were Libertarian principles. LOL.

The "market" in the US favors Creationism, are you suggesting I should? This seems to be a rather, as you put it, "pathetic" argument. The truth is nuclear power is a safe technology and should be used as much as possible under, as you said, 'very careful regulation.' As opposed to "careless regulation" I suppose.

 

[Upsidedown Fuji]

Now I see why the Speculawyer official thread on Fukushima/Nuclear news hasn't been busy. This extra thread exists.

Not surprised there are still reactions going on up to this point. The extent of the damage sustained during the quake and tsunami took away nearly all the control TEPCO had over their geriatric generators.

At least this time around TEPCO didn't sit on the information and say everything was going well like they have been over the past half year. Its kind of hard to hide now anyhow.

I hope the reactions can be stopped for good and soon.

 

[Al-ibn Kermit]

Well economically is where it falls apart. The reactors are extremely expensive site, license, and build. And the potential fall-out (pun intended) from an accident is so great that we subsidize the fuck out of nuclear power with things like the Price-Anderson act. (Think of the value of all that land around the Fukushima plant which is now pretty much worthless.) Yet even with the massive subsidy, there hasn't been a new plant built in 30 years.

I think nuclear power should continue since fossil fuels are dirty and finite. But nuclear needs to very carefully regulated.

With the chernobyl accident you might have a point but ultimately that was caused entirely by human negligence.

But the situation in Japan and Fukushima goes directly against your point as the actual Tsunami that caused the reactor melt-down was far, far, far more destructive than the reactors themselves. Nobody has died because of the Fukushima plant, which to me is impressive considering how old the plant is combined with the safety screw-ups by the plant operators (ie: Their back-up diesel generator wasn't even compatible with their pump system).

We need to continue to research making renewables more efficient, but we need to also actually build nuclear plants for providing our energy for at least the near future. That's a hard concept for some people (not you) to grasp so every time this topic comes up you end up with a minefield of opinions.

 

[speculawyer]

The "market" in the US favors Creationism, are you suggesting I should? This seems to be a rather, as you put it, "pathetic" argument. The truth is nuclear power is a safe technology and should be used as much as possible under, as you said, 'very careful regulation.' As opposed to "careless regulation" I suppose.

Live by the sword, die by the sword . . . except when you don't like it? Perhaps I should complement you on your growth in admitting that the market is not always the best solution. That was MY point and it seems you are learning. Good. Now maybe you'll sit it is true in other areas as well.

 

[Gaborn]

Live by the sword, die by the sword . . . except when you don't like it? Perhaps I should complement you on your growth in admitting that the market is not always the best solution. That was MY point and it seems you are learning. Good. Now maybe you'll sit it is true in other areas as well.

I don't think I've ever argued that markets are absolutes. I'm hardly JayDubya.

 

[BocoDragon]

In geological time humanity has existed for a negligible time.

It doesn't matter. 9.0 earthquakes are routine on planet Earth on the long timescale, therefore they can happen at an moment and they are a realistic threat. It's incorrect to make it seem like it's a "freak accident" that no one could ever predict.... 9.0 earthquakes will happen again and again. Therefore, consideration for such quakes is intrinsically a part of the nuclear risk. It's not an external freak occurance, thrust upon the perfectly safe nuclear industry.

Perhaps this fact doesn't mean abolishment of nuclear power... but it does mean that you must design plants to withstand that force, or you can't expect them to be safe over a long enough timeline..... (and that day could come in 10,000 years, or tomorrow, it's not a matter of age)

 

[Ether_Snake]

Now I see why the Speculawyer official thread on Fukushima/Nuclear news hasn't been busy. This extra thread exists.

Not surprised there are still reactions going on up to this point. The extent of the damage sustained during the quake and tsunami took away nearly all the control TEPCO had over their geriatric generators.

At least this time around TEPCO didn't sit on the information and say everything was going well like they have been over the past half year. Its kind of hard to hide now anyhow.

I hope the reactions can be stopped for good and soon.

Actually they did sit on their asses; the info came from others, at least in the first case:

Tepco is aware of the estimate from the institute through media reports and has no comment, spokesman Hajime Motojuku said today by phone.

 

[Gaborn]

It doesn't matter. 9.0 earthquakes are routine on planet Earth on the long timescale, therefore they can happen at an moment and they are a realistic threat. It's incorrect to make it seem like it's a "freak accident" that no one could ever predict.... 9.0 earthquakes will happen again and again. Therefore, consideration for such quakes is intrinsically a part of the nuclear risk. It's not an external freak occurance, thrust upon the perfectly safe nuclear industry.

Perhaps this fact doesn't mean abolishment of nuclear power... but it does mean that you must design plants to withstand that force, or you can't expect them to be safe over a long enough timeline..... (and that day could come in 10,000 years, or tomorrow, it's not a matter of age)

sure. I think it was more the combination of the earth quake and the tsunami that did it though. If either even occurred separately the plant would have been fine. Combined it was too much to handle. I think most modern plants can handle that kind of earthquake though, just as earthquake proof buildings are better now than in the 70s.

 

[speculawyer]

With the chernobyl accident you might have a point but ultimately that was caused entirely by human negligence.

But the situation in Japan and Fukushima goes directly against your point as the actual Tsunami that caused the reactor melt-down was far, far, far more destructive than the reactors themselves. Nobody has died because of the Fukushima plant, which to me is impressive considering how old the plant is combined with the safety screw-ups by the plant operators (ie: Their back-up diesel generator wasn't even compatible with their pump system).

We need to continue to research making renewables more efficient, but we need to also actually build nuclear plants for providing our energy for at least the near future. That's a hard concept for some people (not you) to grasp so every time this topic comes up you end up with a minefield of opinions.

You can't really subject Chernobyl to market consideration since it was designed and built by a communist system.

But the Fukushima is directly on point. How destructive the Tsunami was is not relevant . . . the market is not for Tsunamis. And I said nothing about the number of deaths. The economics of it are that the cost of evacuations, lost land, lost plants, clean up, etc. will exceed the entire amount of money made from nuclear power in Japan's entire history. So in retrospect, it was not a good business.


That said, I think we have to continue with it. Learn from it and move on with better systems. It was known that there were larger Tsunamis in the past than the plant was designed to handle. So they should have built it on higher ground. And since so much land can be lost if there is an accident, the plants need should be situated far from heavily populated areas (which is something they did well with Fukushima).

 

[Dai101]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zhJljblPcY

And beaten like a red haired step child

 

[BocoDragon]

sure. I think it was more the combination of the earth quake and the tsunami that did it though. If either even occurred separately the plant would have been fine. Combined it was too much to handle. I think most modern plants can handle that kind of earthquake though, just as earthquake proof buildings are better now than in the 70s.

I hope so. I'm sure new plant designers are obsessing over earthquake-proof techniques at this point.

 

[Upsidedown Fuji]

Actually they did sit on their asses; the info came from others, at least in the first case:

I see. I should probably read more. I've been watching too much Japanese news on TV as of late. The media here sure does spin things in Tepco's favor.

 

[cynlix]

How many people have died fom Fukushima?

Last I checked it was zero.

Radiation poisoning in small amounts is not a swift death. It can be a silent killer and can take years and years for symptoms to be noticeable.

 

[foodtaster]

Nuclear is bad. Natural disasters happen all the time, and randomly. That being said, drilling for oil is much worse. Nuclear until solar is perfected and we have energy storage perfected as well.

 

[Enron]

Yeah, let's all take lessons about energy from Enron. LOL! He's clearly the smartest guy in the room.

Fuck yeah motherfucker

Darn those pesky people who disagree with you. (Whichever side they're on, I don't know your stance.)
Why do they have to be so wrong all the time?

i r pro-nukular.

 

[RSLAEV]

This man doesn't give a damn about your fission.

Seriously though this is fucked up.

 

[teh_pwn]

Besides immediate pollution that coal produces, it's going to put coastal cities like New York City under water in about 100 years. A problem that dwarfs Fukushima that can be engineered around with a combination of fission, solar, wind, and thermal until fusion is figured out.

When a bridge falls you don't stop using bridges. You figure out why it fell and you engineer a solution. Stop living off the power of the 1800s.

 

[Takuan]

What of the oceanlife in that area?

 

[Upsidedown Fuji]

http://i.imgur.com/K061e.jpg


This man doesn't give a damn about your fission.

Seriously though this is fucked up.

The water probably isn't even from the reactor or anywhere near the plant anyhow. Its all window dressing.

 

[RumblingRosco]

Bad news for nuclear is good news for my field (biofuels).

But, I'll be honest here, I think nuclear is a great option until researchers such as myself stop sucking ass and start producing efficient and scale-able methods for the bio-production of ethanol, butanol, methanol, fatty acids, etc.

 

[Takeda Kenshi]

Cue people that take a poorly maintained 40 year old plant that experienced two catastrophic events right after each other and claim that nuclear power should be banned.

I fucking love you.

 

[Cronox]

Fission sucks. Fusion is the answer, and with the proper funding and without interference from current energy market leaders it could be here faster than you'd think.

https://lasers.llnl.gov/about/missions/energy_for_the_future/life/

 

[Jme]

It's great that we turned this into a debate on nuclear safety (or lack thereof) instead of the topic at hand (yes, its an adjacent topic but still, you wanna have a nuclear debate make a thread)

 

[Freshmaker]

Darn those pesky people who disagree with you. (Whichever side they're on, I don't know your stance.)
Why do they have to be so wrong all the time?

Facts only come down on one side here.

 

[Deku]

Oh boy, I can't wait!

Spoiler

Keep digging that fossil fuel grave while praying for miraculous advances in renewable energy, residents of Earth.

Wind will save us!

 

[BorkBork]

This man doesn't give a damn about your fission.

Seriously though this is fucked up.

What's the context of this picture?

If it's what I think it is, that's pretty ballsy. And stupid.

 

[BladeoftheImmortal]

Perfect time to make a new Godzilla movie.

He keeps getting bigger and bigger.

 

[Dude Abides]

You enviro-hippies are so naive. Once we eliminate human fallibility and natural disasters nuclear power will be perfectly safe.

 

[TheNatural]

I don't think nuclear power needs to be stopped, there obviously needs to be some much better contingency plans though for plants like this so when the very worst case crazy stuff happens they know what to do. Instead, we get a bunch of countries or companies looking out for protecting their ass and lying about the possible damage instead of just spending some money to develop a plan in the first place.

Pouring water onto the reactor to cool it and all the other stuff they did after this happened was some horrible shit. Anything nuclear effects everyone in the WORLD, not just a little area or country. Worst case scenarios need to be planned for because that's exactly what happened and they weren't ready.

 

[teh_pwn]

You enviro-hippies are so naive. Once we eliminate human fallibility and natural disasters nuclear power will be perfectly safe.

Yep. And bridges.

 

[speculawyer]

Fission sucks. Fusion is the answer, and with the proper funding and without interference from current energy market leaders it could be here faster than you'd think.

https://lasers.llnl.gov/about/missions/energy_for_the_future/life/

It is extremely difficult. How do you contain it? There is no timeline for fusion at this point . . . just a distant hope.

 

[iidesuyo]

The Japanese haven't even realized yet what happened to them in Fukushima. This is fucking them to the ground and - as usual - the taxpayers are going to pay for it.

 

[Upsidedown Fuji]

What's the context of this picture?

If it's what I think it is, that's pretty ballsy. And stupid.

This is the article you want. http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/nn20111101a7.html

It really proves nothing but it sure does look good in pictures.

 

[teh_pwn]

It is extremely difficult. How do you contain it? There is no timeline for fusion at this point . . . just a distant hope.

Agreed with the time problem. We can't afford to rely on coal for 30 more years unless we're willing to give the next generation even more shit to deal with.

However a fusion reaction is theoretically fail safe. If it's magnetic based, no magnetism => collapsed reaction. Or lasers, no lasers => collapsed reaction. System failures result in a collapsed reaction very quickly.

 

[Amibguous Cad]

It doesn't matter. 9.0 earthquakes are routine on planet Earth on the long timescale, therefore they can happen at an moment and they are a realistic threat. It's incorrect to make it seem like it's a "freak accident" that no one could ever predict.... 9.0 earthquakes will happen again and again. Therefore, consideration for such quakes is intrinsically a part of the nuclear risk. It's not an external freak occurance, thrust upon the perfectly safe nuclear industry.

Perhaps this fact doesn't mean abolishment of nuclear power... but it does mean that you must design plants to withstand that force, or you can't expect them to be safe over a long enough timeline..... (and that day could come in 10,000 years, or tomorrow, it's not a matter of age)

Extinction level events are common on the timescale you want us to examine. If we're really concerned about such long timescale threats, a little bit more radiation in nature paes in comparison to a meteor strike.

 

[iidesuyo]

The new Marlboro Man

 

[HyperionX]

Agreed with the time problem. We can't afford to rely on coal for 30 more years unless we're willing to give the next generation even more shit to deal with.

However a fusion reaction is theoretically fail safe. If it's magnetic based, no magnetism => collapsed reaction. Or lasers, no lasers => collapsed reaction. System failures result in a collapsed reaction very quickly.

Actually that's not the reason why fusion reactors are safer; they are safer because they have no decay heat. Every current fission reactor out there will shut off in seconds if their is a problem, but it can't stop decay heat and that fucks things up.

 

[GrotesqueBeauty]

Extinction level events are common on the timescale you want us to examine. If we're really concerned about such long timescale threats, a little bit more radiation in nature paes in comparison to a meteor strike.

This is important to note, because man is equally responsible for meteors and the production of nuclear waste.

 

[Upsidedown Fuji]

The Japanese haven't even realized yet what happened to them in Fukushima. This is fucking them to the ground and - as usual - the taxpayers are going to pay for it.

The tax payers are already getting ready to bend over for this and from what I can tell, they aren't even blinking an eye over it for the most part... Sometimes the apathy of the Japanese public really makes me rage.

The national government plans to raise taxes to double what they currently are to mostly help rebuild northern Japan. A lot of that money will also go towards propping up Tepco. Not to mention Tepco is pretty hell bent on passing the cost of the Fukushima disaster on to their customers by proposed (most likely will happen) rate hikes and peak time rate hikes starting this winter if they have their way. Heres a link to the article concerning this winter's planned peak rate hikes http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/nn20111031a1.html#.Tq8vSsXFpGE

I know Tepco hasn't even scratched the surface of scaling back projects and selling off properties to make ends meet for disaster relief and reparations. They shouldn't even have this idea on the table. And the scary thing is not many people seem to really give two craps about it here. At least not to the point that they are all that vocal about it. The news just gives short news blips on it even though its a pretty big thing. Electricity already costs an arm and a leg here. Now they want to raise it more even though all this was their fault. F-em.

 

[Log4Girlz]

When Godzilla emerges hook him up to some power lines. Clamp that shit to her nipples.

 

[Utako]

Cue people that take a poorly maintained 40 year old plant that experienced two catastrophic events right after each other and claim that nuclear power should be banned.

In after people ignore that this could only happen with nuclear power.

I hope that the area can recover swiftly (as much as it can "recover") in 2012.

 

[iidesuyo]

Electricity already costs an arm and a leg here.

My favourite argument from people bashing Germany for opting out of nuclear power in the future; "you will have have energy shortages!". The only country in the western world that has shortages is Japan which relied too heavy on nuclear power.

Don't be so stupid, nuclear power is NOT the future.

 

[Orayn]

In after people ignore that this could only happen with nuclear power.

I hope that the area can recover swiftly (as much as it can "recover") in 2012.

Fossil fuels and the associated fires have rendered far more land uninhabitable than nuclear accidents.

 

[Cronox]

It is extremely difficult. How do you contain it? There is no timeline for fusion at this point . . . just a distant hope.

Did you read my link?

A Game-Changing Energy Solution

How does it work? In a laser fusion power plant, fuel pellets are rapidly injected into an interaction chamber, producing pulses of fusion energy that heat a blanket of material surrounding the chamber. The fusion heat is then transferred to a power conversion system to produce electricity.

Next year will be the first test of working fusion at the lab. After that it's simply a matter of building plants and overcoming entrenched interests.