Posted on 11/29/2014 6:26:45 AM PST by WhiskeyX
A short film based on current conditions in Chernobyl & Pripyat.
(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...
How is it a “liberal-like attack” to state the straightforward objective truth? To qualify as a “liberal-like attack” typically involves the usage of lies and half-truths to deceive the audience, and my comments did the exact opposite with the objective truth in a manner no more confrontational than the grave allegations you negligently made against an entire industry without a shred of truth or justification. Take for example the over the top accusation you made by saying the Fukushima radioactivity was far worse than the Chernobyl disaster. The Chernobyl disaster has been compared to the release of radioactivity from 400 Hiroshima atomic bombs set off at one time. Here you are trying to promote fear and loathing about the Fukushima disaster claiming it was worse than Chernobyl, when in fact the radiation contamination is less than one ten-millionth of the radioactivity, which is a level more akin to eating bananas on a daily basis or the exposue eceived by the aircrew of passenger jets in flight around the world every day. With that level of negligent, I hope, disregard for reality, why would you not expect a harsh criticism of such unwarranted hysteria, fear, uncertainty, and doubt? Don’t you understand such improper and ignorant commentary in today’s political climate is something akin to shouting fire in a crowded theater and then wondering why someone would be mean enough to sternly remonstrate your misbehavior? And please, don’t try to argue “deformation of character.” It’s defamation of character, and you are not being defamed. If there is any defamation, not “deformation”, going on here, it is your own defamation of the people and organizations you associate with a level of radioactivity which did not even remotely occur in any but the wildest of Liberal fantasies.
Based upon your comments, it appears you have not the remotest understanding of the material you are reading and using as the basis of your comments. Let me emphasize, this criticism is not offered as subjective hyperbole. It is offered as literal and objective fact. You talk about “radioactive debris” as if it is some lurid and monstrous calamity on a scale greater than the Chernobyl disaster, which quite literally reveals how you fail to understand the difference between a banana and 400 Hiroshima atomic bombs with respect to the levels of radioactive exposures they release into the environment.
Until you can refrain from such wildly hysterical hyperbole long enough to have a sane discussion, you’re opening yourself to some very strong criticism for disseminating such hysteria.
I suggest you take a long and hard look at the various methods used to measure and describe levels of exposures to radioactivity and their application to determining the short-term and long-term effects upon human health. Until and unless you can gain a realistic understanding of how radioactivity effects are determined, a rational discussion of the risks of nuclear power plants and radioactive materials is not going to be possible.
“Yea...right. Great input, but’cha ain’t gonna convince me.”
I can believe that. You would hardly be the first person who went to their grave still grasping to their superstitions. That doesn’t mean the rest of us have to live with your irrational superstitions just because you refuse to make an objective consideration of the easy to see evidence.
“I live fairly close to the South Texas Nuclear project. Although it’s never had a release near the magnitude of these other incidents, go out and look at their safety record over the last decade. Small releases are very frequent.”
Yes, and so what? Have you ever bothered to measure the radioactivity you released with one your bigger and hairier farts? Makes an interesting science experiment with your more sensitive radiation detectors. Try it before and after eating broccoli. Compare the results to the releases of radioactivity from your nearby nuclear plant. While you’re at it, try making some more measurements of radioactivity in some residential basements, warehouses with steel I-beam posts and concrete floors, aboard a commercial passenger jet flight cruising at an altitude of 36,000 feet above sea level, in your automobile in Denver, and on your spouse’s skin while snuggling under the covers in bed.
“You may say, well those are in acceptable levels. Ok, fair enough. Why then is it frowned upon to catch and eat fish within a certain distance of this plant? Because of health precautions.”
The word, “precautions”, is the reason. The nuclear power industry’s most potent risks and threats are lawyers, politicians, and pseudo-environmentalists who will seize upon the remotest and most superstitious fantasies imaginable as an excuse to sue the nuclear power industry into non-existence. Accordingly, the nuclear power industry finds it expedient to mitigate the risk of someone suing them over the fish. The reality is that people are far more likely to develop cancer from the radiation emitted by the fly ash of a coal-fired or wood-fired power plant than a nuclear power plant. Even that is not saying much at all, because those cancer risks are still far below the radioactive exposure risks for a wide range of other normal human activities. See for example:
Coal Ash Is More Radioactive than Nuclear Waste
By burning away all the pesky carbon and other impurities, coal power plants produce heaps of radiation
December 13, 2007 |By Mara Hvistendahl
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste/
Smith, Jim, Sasina, N., Kryshev, A., Belova, N. and Kudelsky, A. (2009) A review and test of predictive models for the bioaccumulation of radiostrontium in fish. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity, 100 (11). pp. 950-954. ISSN 0265-931X 10.1016/j.jenvrad.2009.07.005
http://eprints.port.ac.uk/145/
“It only takes ONE major release. In Europe, feral hogs are being tested every now and again for their levels of contamination after Chernobyl. They dig for fungus, mushrooms and become contaminated. If folks consume feral hogs...what happens? Does the contamination cook off. I’m being silly of course.”
You ARE being silly by irrationally comparing the Chernobyl nuclear power plant to every other power plant in existence now and in the future. It is this same irrationality which has blocked our ability to retire the early generation of nuclear power plants and replace them with the newer nuclear power plants which incapable of producing such disasters. It also irrationally obstructs the development of thorium and fusion nuclear power plants which cannot produce such radioactive wastes and risks.
“We now are detecting large amounts of radioactive waste along the CA. coast to Oregon.”
No, your statement misrepresents reality. Your statement says, “large amounts of radioactive waste....” which is untrue with respect to being a low, medium, or high level release of radioactivity. The amount of radioactivity from the Fukushima disaster are being detected in the seawaters along North America’s Pacific coast are so low, they are several orders of magnitude below the lowest level of radioactivity which results in radioactive poisoning that defines the bottom of Level 3 Serous radioactivity and are still within the Level 0 for natural background radioactivity in the sea. The radioactivity is significantly “larger” than the normal background of radioactivity along the Pacific Coast, but it is also far far smaller than the radioactivity in the same Pacific seawaters after a significant undersea volcanic eruption or volcanic eruption ashore setting free copious amounts of radioactive volcanic ash and magma in the sea.
“Would you want your child swimming in the ocean in these areas? Would you go fishing and take your catch home for your family to consume? Not me.”
Absolutely, we do all of the time. We eat generous amounts of Alaska cod, salmon, and other seafood nearly every week. The Fukushima radioactivity in the Pacific seawaters is far less than the radioactivity exposures encountered each day in the office buildings and retail stores.
“I understand where your coming from, just seems we’ve not totally made safe this sort of technology. I am convinced cancer clusters will pop up all through Japan because of their lil experiment with nuke tech.”
That is because you are succumbing to FUD and superstition instead of reason and evidence.
Coal Ash Is More Radioactive than Nuclear Waste
By burning away all the pesky carbon and other impurities, coal power plants produce heaps of radiation
December 13, 2007 |By Mara Hvistendahl
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste/
Perhaps somewhere, but post 19 still goes unanswered, I would like to know those numbers so that I can use them in discussions.
You called me a liar. You did nothing to present facts with backing. That was a personal attack. Liberal tactics.
I have a degree in physics. None of my professors believed nuclear power to be safe.
Great...thanx
We can thank Jimmy Carter for that problem. There was a company set up to reprocess nuclear waste but it was put out of business and shipped overseas.
The waste repository in Yucca Mtn in Nevada (Nevada Test Site) has been held up by the watermelons since the mid ‘80’s.
As I stated before, calling someone a liar is a liberal-like attack. It is an attempt to win an argument through character reduction. You did state "facts", but no links for substantiation.
A gentleman in a an actual discussion might support your side by referencing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_effects_from_the_Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster
I provided links in my post #18. I'm still waiting for your informed and gentlemanly rebuttals.
for later
Well you're actually asking a strange question in terms of blue color workers, many times the immediate deaths are not from radiation but from a possible related cause. If your interested in the risk to a worker from working around radiation the following link will help you research and source it:
Idaho State University Health Physics -- Radiation and Risk
There is actually all kinds of data on the very serious nuclear/industrial accidents: TMI, Chernobyl and Fukushima (to name a few) and the deaths involved. You can get data on them with a simple GOOGLE search. So much so that I question why you ask or if your serious.
If you're interested in the health physics aspects, the above link will help and there are links from there to many, many more sources that can be found from links from that page/site. The link at the very bottom of that page takes you to a plethora of links on relevant information on HP information if your interested.
Post 19 isn’t a strange question, look at it, most deaths in oil and coal and non nuclear energy are blue collar workers, I have cut firewood in the mountains for a living, and my step brother still cuts firewood, that is dangerous work and also part of non nuclear energy.
To: WhiskeyX
Has anyone done the numbers on how many blue collar workers have died in the last 50 years involved in non nuclear energy fields of exploration, producing and using, such as oil and coal? How about the deaths and costs from pollution?
19 posted on 11/29/2014, 9:37:42 AM by ansel12
In fact the city of Kiev is in a very close proximity of Chernobyl. Kievans are extremely lucky the wind haven’t brought a fallout in their direction or it would become a catastrophe of really gigantic proportions.
BTW, I believe this accident actually contributed to the Soviet collapse much more than Afghan War which believed to be the main reason.
Not only the cost of relief operation was enormous, the way Gorbachev administration lied and handled it initially was the main reason why people has finally lost all faith in the Soviets.
Not to menton Hiroshima and Nagasaki.....Have you seen the resultant mutants that are eking out a subsistance in the rubble of those cities? Scary......
I apologize for my last post to you. Your liberal-like attack made me angry. Stick to discussion of the topic if you can. Do not resort to deformation of character.
I just disagree. Now, all the technical analysis he shot out there (you can read earlier in the chain) may have some validity, not arguing that.
I'm no newkler physicist, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn last night. Seriously though, in my early years, I did work in an industrial radiography crew out in the chemical plants of south Texas for a spell. We had film badges that measured monthly exposure as well as Geiger counters and dosimeters.
This sort of work had it's dangers due to overexposure, but it's peanuts compared to Fukashima and Chernobyl where the countryside is laid in waste for decades and folks in the path of the fallout cloud exposed to lethal doses.
One nano-particle of certain ions if inhaled into the lungs will bring about an early death.
Young ones day must have learned their manners from wolves. Calling someone a liar is considerably different than indicating that an opponent must be misinformed, and then providing intellectual evidence to support that claim. No wonder this Nation is falling apart. The young folks have no idea about how to act civilized or to conduct discourse. A democratic republic cannot function if those with whom you disagree automatically become your enemy and an object of your contempt.
Get civilized, young man.
Oh, pardon me, I forgot to add that there has been no evidence to the contrary regarding my claims. Opinions to the contrary were posted, but no references to facts. On the other hand, I provided links to my sources. Where is the formal and civilized rebuttal? Until you and your keeper can present evidence to the contrary, I still think nuclear power plants are a dreadfully dangerous mistake.
Not to mention that the far Left was both pro-Soviet and anti-Nuclear. It put them in a very bad bind. One thing that killed the Soviets was television. How are you going to keep them on the collective when they have seen Dallas?
Odd. In Florida the warm water leaving our nuclear power plants provides safety and an environment conducive for food growth for our fish. Winter frost comes and the fish move toward the warmer water of the plant. I believe it’s that way all over the country.
Oh wait - you’re talking about Chernobyl ... not US plants... my bad. This is a conservative site... we don’t have liberal fear mongers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.