Greenpeace: Arctic 30
- Thread starter securespark
- Start date
Sponsored Links
How radioactive? Can you provide a qualitative figure for the benefit of the forum? I'll do the translation into Banana Equivalent Dose for the benefit of the board too.
Nozzle
Whichever side of the pro/anti nuclear fence you sit on, this is an interesting read, with an interesting social context.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goiânia_accident
Nozzle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goiânia_accident
Nozzle
Sponsored Links
Still waiting to find out what going near Fukushima has to do with whether we install new nuclear in the UK.
But in the meantime, I'll just leave this here:
The more land we use for energy production, the more we impact on the environment. Nuclear does rather well I'd say.
As for land use in the area of Fukushima, here is an interesting discussion on some of the readings found in the comments section of the blog. The person is a well thought contributor to the blog:
Cobalt info here:
http://www.remm.nlm.gov/ANL_ContaminantFactSheets_All_070418.pdf
So an increase risk of less than 1%.
But in the meantime, I'll just leave this here:
The more land we use for energy production, the more we impact on the environment. Nuclear does rather well I'd say.
As for land use in the area of Fukushima, here is an interesting discussion on some of the readings found in the comments section of the blog. The person is a well thought contributor to the blog:
http://www.thingsworsethannuclearpower.com/2012/03/earthquakes-and-tsunamis.html
Cobalt info here:
http://www.remm.nlm.gov/ANL_ContaminantFactSheets_All_070418.pdf
So an increase risk of less than 1%.
And of course, if you lived in Iran, you could be exposed to levels of radiation above recommended levels, just from natural background radiation:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11769138
A level of 260 mSv y(-1) have recorded in Ramsar, which is over 13x higher than the 20 mSv permitted for radiation workers- and have possibly lower rates of cancer. These are levels above evacuation thresholds set in many industrial countries, and Ramsar is hardly a nuclear wasteland! In fact, Ramsar was the city where international wetland conservation treaties were signed.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11769138
A level of 260 mSv y(-1) have recorded in Ramsar, which is over 13x higher than the 20 mSv permitted for radiation workers- and have possibly lower rates of cancer. These are levels above evacuation thresholds set in many industrial countries, and Ramsar is hardly a nuclear wasteland! In fact, Ramsar was the city where international wetland conservation treaties were signed.
More propaganda.
Sure it is, it's a game of two halves. The Green lobby is just as "guilty" of propaganda as is the Nuclear lobby. That is the politics of the issue; one side pedals numbers, the other side pedals emotion but "at the end of the day" it's all down to opinion. If you respond to figures or if your respond to emotion. Any propaganda from the "green" side that includes references to children is one such example - and it does the remainder of the green lobby a disservice. Oh won't someone think of the children!! Get with the programme, if the currency is the survival of future generations on a halfway hospitable planet, then nuclear generation IS a part of that mix.
Nozzle
'Someone' said...
So maybe you can tell us the safety history of all the nuclear power plants currently operating that are of the same design as the one proposed at Hinkley?
What's that I hear you mutter?...There are no current nuclear power plants of that design in operation?
And you must be aware that the first similar one of these due to go into operation is massively over budget, and years behind schedule?
You must also be aware that EDF is swamped with litigation due to it's lack of H&S, cheap labour usage, and financial fraud?
And then of course you are also no doubt aware of the construction 'irregularities' which puts the whole 'spent fuel' storage facilty at risk?
No doubt you will also be aware of the fact that EDF officials were jailed for espionage, particularly of Greenpeace?
You know f*ck all of the risks wobs, and keep spouting the usual automated b*llocks that governments and their corporate masters do...
It is to be a PWR - there are hundreds in operation across the planet, and a number in submarines and ships too, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PWR_reactors
Nozzle
I was surprised to see there are so many, especially in France (and the US of course).
If only we had had the same foresight.
Actually it is to be an EPR - which is a new unit that has no operational plants yet...
EDF said it's first one (flamanville) would be operational in 2012 for a cost of $4bn...
Now it is $11bn and due to start in 2016
Who knows when it will actually open and how much it will actually cost...
And there is no record for this model of reactor which has been plagued with safety design issues so far...
So you tell me if there is a risk, and whether it is financially viable at Hinkley!
They are both pressurised water reactors, with the difference that one has the word 'European' added!
An interesting article on Greenpeace, and their stances on various issues, including nuclear opf course:
http://www.activistcash.com/organizations/131-greenpeace/
Well worth a read.
http://www.activistcash.com/organizations/131-greenpeace/
Well worth a read.
Sponsored Links
