[Peter Zack]

Jeff, your bias is clear and it's pointless to argue against a firmly held, even if misinformed, opinion. Chernobyl was a crap plant plagued with design flaws and corrupt operators. It's surprising it didn't go sooner. But Western and Asian plants are operated under much stricter regulations and far better designs.

There is no possible way to compare the deaths that oil has caused, environmental destruction and wars. Consider this. If we were able to switch to Nuclear (and sources like solar, wind etc.) completely tomorrow. Electric cars, all manner of transportation, heating homes, running factories, etc. How much better would the air be, the earth and water? How many wars would no longer have the fuel (money) to be fought.

As an industry, oil has been a scourge to the planet and it's inhabitants. Safe nuclear, wind power, solar and similar energy sources could resolve much of this.

Does nuclear have issues? Sure it does. Waste storage is one big issue. A damaged reactor is another. But this industry is far safer and takes this much more seriously than oil does.

[mikemike]

Second, barring the long reach of global warming making the entire planet inhabitable MOST energy disasters do not have half life's in the 1000's of years..

What is the half-life of a pond of coal ash? Is it less than the life of the dam built to hold it back?

Have you ever heard of naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM)? A lot of oil and gas processing equipment and pipelines that move crude and gas from the well to the refinery are radioactive by the time they reach the end of their service life.

Rare earth metals that are used in the electric cars, wind turbines, and solar panels usually occur along with uranium and thorium so mining them results in radioactive waste and refining them requires extremely toxic chemicals.

[GeneV]

What is the half-life of a pond of coal ash? Is it less than the life of the dam built to hold it back?

Have you ever heard of naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM)? A lot of oil and gas processing equipment and pipelines that move crude and gas from the well to the refinery are radioactive by the time they reach the end of their service life.

Rare earth metals that are used in the electric cars, wind turbines, and solar panels usually occur along with uranium and thorium so mining them results in radioactive waste and refining them requires extremely toxic chemicals.

Or, how long does a ton of CO2 stay in the atmosphere?

[jeffkrol]

No one has been killed in the west by a nuclear accident since 1945ish. The exception is the socialist/communist pi$$ poor designed reactor in Russia. I would suggest you research and track the deaths caused by petrolium and coal mining during the same period. Eleven or twelve alone were killed on the Gulf oil rig.

Far more bungee jumping left handed nuns have been killed than by western nukes.

how would you know???? Direct death is actually (to me) the least problematic side effect...
how many killed by the toxic waste in love canal???

[jeffkrol]

Jeff, your bias is clear and it's pointless to argue against a firmly held, even if misinformed, opinion.

My bias is to not produce extremely toxic, mutagenic and carcinogenic substances that we actually have little handle on storing........
Our need for energy is as real as our need for the sun to rise....
Our ego of thinking "we can handle anything" is problematic at times.
If we have no other option fine, but don't ever believe we should not stop looking.
Fission reactors are just a bad but "possibly" necessary idea... that's all.
Would I want them banned??? Probably but I'm reasonable.. but I'm not going to pretend that there as safe as apple pie. Will they cause the extinction of our species.. probably not but who can tell or even guess how that will come about.

Japanese authorities will release slightly radioactive vapor to ease pressure at nuclear reactor whose cooling system failed.

The failure occurred after a power outage caused by Friday's massive earthquake off northeastern Japan.

Japan's nuclear safety agency says pressure inside one of six boiling water reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi plant had risen to 1.5 times the level considered normal.

The agency said the radioactive element in the vapor that will be released would not affect the environment or human health.

We hardly trust our neighbor much less a press release.....
Japan to release of radioactive vapor at nuke pant - Taiwan News Online
I worked a bit w/ handling and compounding radioactive chemicals (Thorium Fluoride and Uranimum Chloride specifically) so I probably have more "practical experience" on this level then most here, and being a small specialty plant the sh!t ended up everywhere...
fortunately most of it is alpha particles so no sweat... My work boots are either in a cave somewhere or buried in a salt flat.....
UPDATE:
Underscoring grave concerns about the Fukushima plant some 240 km (150 miles) north of Tokyo, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the U.S. air force had delivered coolant to avert a rise in the temperature of the facility's nuclear rods.

Pressure building in the plant was set to be released soon, a move that could result in a radiation leak , officials said. Some 3,000 people who live within a 3 km radius of the plant had been evacuated, Kyodo news agency said.

"It's possible that radioactive material in the reactor vessel could leak outside but the amount is expected to be small and the wind blowing towards the sea will be considere d," Chief Cabinet Yukio Edano told a news conference.

"Residents are safe after those within a 3 km radius were evacuated and those within a 10 km radius are staying indoors, so we want people to be calm," he added.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/11/japan-quake-reactor-idUSL3E7EB2GO20110311
Just a walk int the park ehhh.............

[deadwolfbones]

The vapor they're releasing has a half-life of like 5-7 days. So as long as they're evacuating people it's not a huge deal.

[Peter Zack]

Jeff, I get it. Radioactive materials are extremely toxic and in a Utopia I'd love to get all our power from non toxic, renewable sources. We aren't anywhere close to that. The computer you're reading this from is full of toxic materials, the power to run it partially (maybe all) comes very dirty sources.

As long as we want the 'modern' society we enjoy, then we'll need power from nuclear more and more. Oil is just as carcinogenic, just as dangerous and has caused far more wars, deaths and political unrest than nuclear has or ever will. I'll embrace other well-regulated alternative energy that gets us off the oil tap.

I would contend that the people living down wind from the oil refinery that exploded are in just as much risk and will be so for a much longer time than the 5-7 days from the stream release. Toxic oil residues will last in the surrounding earth and water for decades, endangering the residents near that facility.

[mikemike]

Jeff, I get it. Radioactive materials are extremely toxic and in a Utopia I'd love to get all our power from non toxic, renewable sources. We aren't anywhere close to that. The computer you're reading this from is full of toxic materials, the power to run it partially (maybe all) comes very dirty sources.

Speak for yourself, my computer and all of my power is generated by a very large gerbil wheel which is spun by my unicorn Mr. Sparky.

Wisonsin has 70 coal fired power plants that generate 65.7% of the electricity in the state. Nukes generate another 19.1%. Natural Gas generates 8.3%.

http://www.eia.gov/cneaf/nuclear/state_profiles/wisconsin/WI.html

[clmonk]

Perhaps, but someone still has to clean out from under the gerbil wheel and Unicorn poo and Sparky exhaust is some of the absolute worst I have never smelled!

[Peter Zack]

Touché !

[Phil1]

""how would you know???? Direct death is actually (to me) the least problematic side effect...
how many killed by the toxic waste in love canal???

Here is your Love Canal info Love Canal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It seems that that is all general toxic chemical waste and nada to do with the nuke plant discussion.

I do think more people have been killed by eco friendly sail boats than by nuke plants in the west. Of course the events in Japan are still unfolding. We will see if they tally up to the gulf oil rig disaster.

[jeffkrol]

""how would you know???? Direct death is actually (to me) the least problematic side effect...
how many killed by the toxic waste in love canal???

Here is your Love Canal info Love Canal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It seems that that is all general toxic chemical waste and nada to do with the nuke plant discussion.

I do think more people have been killed by eco friendly sail boats than by nuke plants in the west. Of course the events in Japan are still unfolding. We will see if they tally up to the gulf oil rig disaster.

Why do we have to compare bad things....... bad is bad.

40 yrs ago I'd have said nuclear is the savior of mankind... unfortunately reality got in the way.

I wish Japan, and those downwind, the best of luck..... Hopefully I'm wrong..

CORRECTION: US did NOT bring coolant to Japan......

UPDATE:

Cooling System Fails At Fukushima No. 2 Plant

TOKYO (Kyodo)--The cooling system failed at three reactors of the quake-hit Fukushima No. 2 nuclear power plant Saturday, the operator Tokyo Electric Power Co. said.

The company, which has already scrambled to deal with radiation leaks at its Fukushima No. 1 plant, notified the industry ministry that the failsafe system at the No. 2 plant stopped functioning as the temperature of coolant water has topped 100 C.

http://e.nikkei.com/e/fr/tnks/Nni20110312D12JF371.htm

[Digitalis]

well let's just be thankful the Japanese didn't have an incident like chenobyl. I have been there, and according to my guide you can actually find sizable chunks of the graphite that used to surround the fuel rods in the reactor kilometres away from the reactor.

[gokenin]

completely off topic warning

jeffkrol I am curious what method of creating electricity are you in favor of ? just curious and as I said slightly off topic

[Ratmagiclady]

Well, if one wants to evaluate the risks of nuclear power, especially in disaster-prone areas, it doesn't do to downplay just how close how many reactors came to meltdown over there today. It's fortunate, in fact, that some of the ones at that plant were already shut down for maintenance, or, very likely, that battery power would not have held out long enough, and we actually still don't know if they've kept it down to the release they already have, or how long that'll hold.

Apparently the danger of big enough aftershocks strong enough to cause a meltdown was considered reasonably-past, as of an hour or so ago, anyway, but it was that close in at least one place there.

I hope it's not premature to be using the past tense, but even without that, this was very close to big-time nuclear disaster there today.


The lack of official word for a while probably means they're still struggling to keep or get things under control, there.

When it comes to nuclear power, pretending that even *really careful and earthquake-aware countries spending a lot of resources on it* aren't taking some serious risks with it is no kind of responsible way to be discussing nuclear safety. Serious business, however you slice it, and I'd say nothing to leave to some 'invisible hand of the market' and hope for good luck.