Fukushima

[flacky]

forward thinking.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13592208

[DrJive]

^^^^Agree... now if only that spineless toff would make the UK follow ze Germans

[flacky]

[ATTMFKH]

^^^ I remember them - had the English ones Nuclear Power No Thanks stuck everywhere - this was when I was a member of Youth CND ............ also had one of those T-Shirts

The Only Safe Fast Breeder is The Rabbit

fuel rods for goal-posts isn't it

[flacky]

Aye, I had one of them on the bottom of my skateboard in the late 80s. I was so radical...

[flacky]

just to keep the thread alive. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13678627

[waxer00]

quote from the report above in japan.
` the nuclear safety agency is part of the industry ministry, which promotes nuclear power`
what a fuck up for everyone and not just the japanese.

[kayu]

I watched a report on the current situation in Japan last night. The Japanese government are promoting a new global regulatory body to inspect and monitor all nuclear power plants around the world. They are presently monitored by the country running the plant with little or no transparency at all. Set up and run properly ,it sounds like a good idea and long overdue . Fukashima has emphasized the global dangers of using nuclear energy , but it still is an attractive and viable power source which will no doubt continue to be used until something better is available. IMO any step towards monitoring and safeguarding these plants is the next best thing to getting rid of them

[flacky]

Europe seems to be bucking the trend Kayu... Germany have recently made massive moves to move away from nuclear, all we can hope is for the rest to follow suit.

[Black]

I think its the Italians who have also recently headed off down the anti-nuclear road too.
International monitoring is a step forward but saying there are no alternative is an odd statement.

[kayu]

I think its the Italians who have also recently headed off down the anti-nuclear road too.
International monitoring is a step forward but saying there are no alternative is an odd statement.

There's alternatives Black...ones that should be used , but I don't think they are viable for enough governments to embrace yet as an alternatives to nuclear or coal powered generators. Any trend away from nuclear is good , and will increase, hopefully , but the vested interests and big companies involved in nuclear and coal industries ($$$$$) will do their best to discredit any alternatives. The problem with most governments is , they have an attention span that only stretches to the next election, and they rely too much on funding from these big power companies . When there is an election coming , its the only time that politicians listen to the people.....

[flacky]

There is a piece in the local news here in the North West about a proposed river system on the Mersey. It's been shelved and the reasons given are very honest. You simply cannot get the funding for these projects as the short term and mid term forecasts were simply not profitable. Long term yes, but backers want rewards in their life time.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-me ... e-13875032

[Black]

Shortsightedness - its got a lot to answer for!

[flacky]

that could be seen as a shortsighted view of the real world.

[flacky]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-13887579

Fucking idiots. I'm glad I'm jumping this shit hole of a ship. I'm fucking GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR.....

3 of them within 110 miles from here.

[kayu]

"""There should be firm laws against putting profit above environmental and social damage"""".......it's kinda sad to think that you can be declared insane for making a public statement like that....... .....but they can do it !!.

[WP101]

christ knows what to believe.
i used to be positive that we are speeding up a climate change and have had stand up arguments with my old man, almost leading to tears
recently ive read about the doctored information coming from the CRU, 'those' emails, the doctored hockey stick graph, the way in which Al Gore ran away with unsubstanciated information from Hawaii and started on a huge money making mission totally blinkered to the guys who supplied him with the information in the first place (his uni tutor).
water vapour is the most prevalent greenhouse gas , CO2 is only 3%
the ice caps are in really good shape actually
the 10,000 windmills that the US have had in operation have produced less power than one coal fired power station could in one year. but they continue to build them, destroying our wildernesses..THEYRE ONLY 14% EFFICIENT!!

This is the most frustrated ive been since puberty

[waxer00]

it`s not an easy problem .there are so many factors to bring to the table .but i fear there could be a modicum of social engineering being employed to steer the masses into the direction big business/governments want us to go.
first create a problem i.e.global financial breakdown /recession,and then offer the cheapest/short term solution that sounds sexy on paper and in soundbites(regardless of longterm health risks known or otherwise)to hoodwink the plebian hordes .
i agree that renewables at the present time will not fill the energy hole(without coal and nuclear),but it` a fledgling industry which will surely ,over time, become more and more efficient.
ignore the renewable industry at our peril,somebody in the not too distant future will make big bucks out of it.we must be at the vanguard,not outside looking in.
staying with nuclear is a cop out environmentally ,politically and economically.

unless of course scientists come up with a way of neutralising the waste ,and the mining/treatment of uranium issues .blah blah blah

[WP101]

it`s not an easy problem .there are so many factors to bring to the table .but i fear there could be a modicum of social engineering being employed to steer the masses into the direction big business/governments want us to go.
first create a problem i.e.global financial breakdown /recession,and then offer the cheapest/short term solution that sounds sexy on paper and in soundbites(regardless of longterm health risks known or otherwise)to hoodwink the plebian hordes .

i agree totally

i agree that renewables at the present time will not fill the energy hole(without coal and nuclear),but it` a fledgling industry which will surely ,over time, become more and more efficient.

with wind power its poor efficiency is down to the wind, it doesnt always blow as they thought it might offshore wind is massively expensive for the umbilical. I have seen how expensive it is just to deploy a tidal turbine, with only a half hour (or less) of slack tide to do it in!

ignore the renewable industry at our peril,somebody in the not too distant future will make big bucks out of it.we must be at the vanguard,not outside looking in.
staying with nuclear is a cop out environmentally ,politically and economically.

again,agreed

[kayu]

Actually , if you consider nuclear in a practical way , the problem is firstly the safeguarding and secondly , disposing of the waiste . Research should be done to try and find a way to "neutralise" the waiste ...it's not good enough to just store it , because nowhere is truely safe from that shit......a safe way to neutralise it would be a game changer......the Klingons worked it out !

[flacky]

Al Gore had good cause, he never had all the facts, but it doesn't mean what he did was wrong. Every action has a reaction etc. When any of the above statements are made, someone will act, someone will react.

The true figures for renewables are not known... It's a scary thing that we may have missed the cleaner route already. Financially it makes zero sense and would bankrupt and isolate almost every country on earth.

The only way to make renewable cost effective is to change consumption. That's something everyone here can help achieve.

He says, switching on his 50" plasma and boiling his kettle.

[Black]

it doesnt always blow as they thought it might offshore wind is massively expensive for the umbilical.

Onshore wind is where the money is - that howls continuously in these parts!!

[waxer00]

He says, switching on his 50" plasma and boiling his kettle.

in my idea of utopia sitting in front of the flat screen supping a cuppa would only be deemed applicable when the the southern winds are screaming through those turbine blades

[Poo Stance]

Anyone else concerned about the lack of coverage Fukushima is getting in the news? From what I've read recently it's now released more radiation that Chernobyl and the Japanese still don't have a plan to bring the release under control. Apparently they are still using sea water to cool the plant, which is then fed back into the ocean.

Our favourite company have done a model predicting the spread of said radioactive particles emanating from the plant...

http://blog.asrltd.com/home/2011/8/11/f ... pdate.html

After only 6 months after the event this does make happy reading for me. The area off the coast of Japan contains two major ocean currents which feed out into the Pacific. As far as I am aware this area was (and probably still is) a major fishing area due to these currents. Having watched 'the cove' on channel 4 and seeing how Japan were/are happy to poison their population selling Dolphin meat as Whale meat, I'm a little concerned at the fish being served up by Japan. I'm aware that crops and livestock movement has been limited in the vicinity of Fukushima, but I've not heard anything about fish being more stringently controlled in the aftermath of this event.

Has anyone got any news/facts about what is happening currently in Japan? Because finding information about this is not so easy.

Thanks.

[mal-nourished]

can any modelling done by the ASR be trusted i mean did they not do the same for the boscombe reef ....

[Poo Stance]

Hold on... are you saying the Boscombe reef doesn't work?

OK, yeah, that is something that has gone through my mind. But if it's anyway near the truth (and I've got no reason to think otherwise or ulterior motive) then it is surely cause for concern. It would be nice to know the rate of decay of these radioactive particles released and how far they could travel round the world in that time.

tis fucked IMO.

[ATTMFKH]

The half-life of uranium-238 is about 4.47 billion years and that of uranium-235 is 704 million years

[Poo Stance]

Oh thats OK, don't think I'll be surfing again in the next 4.47billions years judging by my lack of petrol funds.

[Poo Stance]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... Ocean.html

Has a wee mention about the chance of radioactive particles reaching the Atlantic.

Read this mahoosive piece too. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/se ... -aftermath

With a nice varied selection of comments to pick through too.

Still finding it hard to get fact on whether the Ocean is still being contaminated from the cooling system (there is talk of a storage tank which hold water which they say they are able to process for using again). It seems pretty certain that due to the fuel rods melting through the floor of their containment vessels that groundwater is being contaminated and getting into the ocean that way. With the Japanese gov claiming the situation will be fully contained by Jan 2012. So not too long to wait then.

[Poo Stance]

http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/intelli ... reat/11042

linked from.

http://fukushima.greenaction-japan.org/

45 tonnes (drop in the ocean?) of somesort of radioactive shit seeped into the ocean this weekend. Thats what the officials from TEPCO have said, and they have a reputation of being lenient with the truth throughout this escapade.

Anyone else still have this disaster lingering in the back of their minds?