egafd.com

Jim... "The China Syndrome" is a bloody brilliant film. Enjoy.

I wish people had paid more attention to the important messages in it.

As Sting's song "We Work The Black Seam" says...

"And deadly for twelve-thousand years is carbon 14"...

Basically, if one of those reactors goes tits up, MILLIONS will perish.

Use solar and wind power FFS!!!

Fusion produces highly radio-active material. but it has a half life of a manageable 300 years as against many tens or hundreds of thousands of years for the waste from fission reactors. Besides, the material needed for weapon production is already produced by fission methods. Unfortunately development of fusion reactors is far behind fission ones. At present it isnt possible to get more out than is put in,; only 60% efficient. And the cost has been put at over 1.10 trillion dollars. The total cost of the war in Iraq has been estimated to be over 2.4 trillion, so those that decide this sort of thing obviously have better things to spend our money on.

Here we go with the anti nuclear brigade. Can you get a handle on the situation, nobody has died from anything to do with radiation, simple h2o did all the damage.

'...nobody has died from anything to do with radiation..'

But in 20 years there will probably be a related rise in leukaemia and other cancers.

Nuclear Power? Safe as houses!



"When a reactor at a nuclear power plant in Chernobyl, Ukraine went out of control in April 1986, it led to an explosion and meltdown, contaminating 58,000 square miles of land between Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine, 600,000 residents were evacuated and their homes left permanently abandoned, while 4,000 died of radiation-related causes. The meltdown released a hundred radioactive elements into the atmosphere including dangerous iodine, strontium, and cesium, which are the most dangerous, and can still be found in the affected areas today. In the years since this devastating accident, studies on groups of emergency workers and individuals with the highest exposure rates have linked the radioactive fallout to several health consequences like certain cancers, cardiovascular disease and death."

"Fukushima 1 is one of the oldest nuclear power plants in Japan. It was designed by General Electric and went on line in 1971, and believed to be equipped to function for some hours without emergency diesel generators. These stopgaps failed in as yet unknown circumstances. While operators can quickly shut down a nuclear reactor in an emergency, they cannot allow the cooling systems to stop. Even after the plant?s chain reaction is stopped, its nuclear fuel rods produce heat. Heat from the fuel rods must be removed by water in a cooling system, but that requires power. The plant requires a continuous supply of electricity even after the reactor stops generating its own power. The Fukushima cooling system was being supplied with fresh water until the coolant from the US could arrive.

If the cooling system remains inoperative for long, the water will eventually boil away and the fuel will begin to melt. That is what happened in 1979 at Three Mile Island, the reactor in Pennsylvania that suffered a partial core meltdown. In that case, but mechanical failure, operator error and poor design were to blame."

[quote]Fusion produces highly radio-active material.[/quote]

Of course, but it's easier to control. A fusion reactor hit by a power outage cannot go into meltdown because we have to produce high temperatures to create atoms to fuse. Fission is dangerous because splitting atoms causes a chain reaction that can only be controlled via cooling. No cooling equals meltdown which cannot be controlled.

[quote]Besides, the material needed for weapon production is already produced by fission methods.[/quote]

I don't know how this is relevant to anything I said.

[quote]Unfortunately development of fusion reactors is far behind fission ones. At present it isnt possible to get more out than is put in,; only 60% efficient.[/quote]

Doesn't mean we shouldn't try. The first trans-atlantic flights didn't make a profit but as the technology developed flights became cheaper. That's how things work, usually.

[quote]The total cost of the war in Iraq has been estimated to be over 2.4 trillion, so those that decide this sort of thing obviously have better things to spend our money on.[/quote]

Just wait till the West, India and China are fighting it out for the last drops of oil the planet has to offer. What do you think the cost will be then?

You seem to have missed the point of what I was saying Sam.

I said that a half life of 300 years IS a lot more manageable than tens of thousands years.

Fission producing by-products for nuclear weapons had nothing to do with what you said but is a reason why governments have gone down the easier and cheaper and developed first, fission route.

The cost will be high, but I didn't say it wasn't a reason to try. I was trying a bit of irony, never a good idea on forums I know.

As in all these costings, governments never consider the future cost of not doing something now. Dont tell me the consequences of fighting for the last bit of oil will be bad, I know, I probably as one with you on this subject.

Sorry, Andy. Had a few bottles of Sauvignon tonight!

What you as well? Cabernet S or S Blanc? Apology readily accepted. Onwards and upwards.

Sam Slater say?s?

We don't get earthquakes and tsunamis like Japan does.


Well that?s completely put my mind at rest.

They can build a nuclear power station now at the bottom of our street if they want.