F**cking Gas Prices
- 08-21-2005, 09:23 PM
- 08-21-2005, 10:05 PM
The waste from nuclear isn't that bad. It's usually solid, so just store it somewhere safe, like the Yucca Mt. Plan. It's not like it's going to explode, seep into ground water or anything else for that matter.
Eventually, we will have the technology to minimize even this, what I consider, small problem.
08-21-2005, 10:44 PM
08-21-2005, 10:53 PM
The problem with radioactivity is that it is nearly-eternal. A radioactive substance will remain radioactive for a VERY long time, millenia in some cases. You can't spread it around. There is enough radioactive waste today that if you spread it EVENLY on the whole surface of the globe, the entire place would be a wasteland. It is THAT bad. The idea would be to spread this waste evenly in the whole VOLUME of the earth. Now the guy who invents the technology to do that isn't born yet.
08-21-2005, 10:54 PM
Send it to the moon, I tells ya! God already gave us a nuclear waste dump. Yeah, it's going to mess up some love songs, but it's time we put the moon to some use.Originally Posted by Matthew D
08-21-2005, 11:02 PM
Originally Posted by Matthew D
No it won't. Look I worked with this stuff for 10 years. A solid isn't going anywhere, especially after it is encased in concrete and then shielded in depleted uranium. You put in a secure place like Yucca, and keep tabs on it. So what if it lasts thousands upon thousands of years, it's under a mountain, shielded and well away from people. Plus the technology to minimize even this small problem is at most 25 years away. The research reactor I worked at is/was working on this problem themselves and had developed a way to separate the and reuse the radioactive part of spent fuel rods. You can store this stuff safely and effectively.
08-21-2005, 11:08 PM
It depends on what isotope you're talking about. Some are only radioactive for a few hours, some hundreds of thousands of years. There is a wide range of half-lives among isotopes. The ones that last a long time are usually the safest to store due to what type of radioactive energy is being released(alpha, beta, gamma, x-ray, etc.) Most of the stuff that lasts a long time are alpha-emitters, which means that a piece of paper or your skin can block the radioactivity. You just don't want to get the stuff in your system, where it can do some major damage. Now if you had gamma or x-ray emitters, then there would be some issues, but this isn't the case. Even then, stored under a mountain, away from people, it would be perfectly safe. Some you need to stop looking at "The China Syndrome" for your knowledge on this subject and start looking at from a real fact perspective.Originally Posted by ss01
08-21-2005, 11:23 PM
I don't know how many times I have hear absolutes turn into... well we didn't think it could happen.. AND No I don't base my information from a damn movie.. I do remember hearing when I was a kid that asbestoes was the next best thing to sliced bread and other BS.. alpha-emitting particles do have the ability to mutate DNA and that my friend is a very serious thing.. Someone refresh my memory why did we abandon more than a few nuclear reactor construction sites?
25 years away on dealing with a waste problem.. umm.. I will have to see that to believe that one, not that I think you are lying but I know how that things we thought were coming down the pipe suddenly didn't materialize in the time frame we thought they would.
I know it is stored under a mountain in a area that has not be seismically active for as long as we have been recording but the whole thought of all that waste stored in one area gives me the willies...
I personally wish that Oak Ridge would be able to solve their problems with fusion reactors and then I wouldn't mind nuke power as much..
08-21-2005, 11:27 PM
Relatively Short Half-Lives
Strontium-89 54 days
Zirconium-95 65 days
Niobium-95 39 days
Ruthenium-103 40 days
Rhodium-103 57 min.
Rhodium-106 30 seconds
Iodine-131 8 days
Xenon-133 8 days
Tellurium-134 42 minutes
Barium-140 13 days
Lanthanum-140 40 hours
Cerium-141 32 days
Year to Century-Scale Half-Lives
Hydrogen-3 12 years
Krypton-85 10 years
Strontium-90 29 years
Ruthenium-106 1 year
Cesium-137 30 years
Cerium-144 1.3 years
Promethium-147 2.3 years
Plutonium-238 85.3 years
Americium-241 440 years
Curium-224 17.4 years
Technecium-99 2 x 10^6 y
Iodine-129 1.7 x 10^7 y
Plutonium-239 24,000 y
Plutonium-240 6,500 y
Americium-243 7,300 y
08-22-2005, 07:35 AM
Originally Posted by Matthew D
Alpha-emitters are only harmful if they enter the body. On the outside, there is no danger at all. Unless you plan on eating some, I don't see the problem. DNA mutation is only problem if you exceed the body's ability to repair, which is around 1000mutations per second. That takes a lot millirem to achieve that, plus it would have to be beta, gamma or x-ray emitters or godforbid a neutron emitter(which if that happened, mutation would be the least of your worries.) Like I said in my earlier post, at the research reactor I worked at, they have achieved separating the radioactive part of a spent fuel rod(5% of the rod) from the the rest(95% inert material) and can reuse it. That cuts down tremendously on the waste.
As far as why reactors have been abandoned? Well, because the laws and regulations are so ridiculous when it comes to reactors, they became economically not feasible. Treat it like other industries with sane and logical regs, they would have been completed.
08-23-2005, 01:57 PM
08-23-2005, 05:01 PM
The reactor I worked at can take a direct hit by a 747 and still be intact. You do realize the kind of containment built around these things don't you? 6 to 18 ft of reinforced concrete, 1 to 2 ft of steel, another couple of feet of lead, just to name a few. The outer building(s) will be toast, but the reactor itself will be just fine.
08-27-2005, 11:08 AM
08-27-2005, 11:21 AM
When I saw how much shielding the newer generation of reactors had, I wasn't worried about terrorists. Tracking waste might still be an issue, the reactors aren't.Originally Posted by Sir Foxx
08-27-2005, 11:49 AM
I'll bet that when the exterior buildings of the reactor are all smashed to bits and the inside of the reactor gets shaken HARD by a thousand-ton object flying into it at hundreds of miles an hour, that some part of the management system fails, and the whole thing goes meltdown.
That's the worrisome part. Oh, and if the 9/11 attacks really wanted to REALLY rattle america, they would have tried something like that.
08-27-2005, 01:30 PM
I would doubt it from what I've seen. The things are built like small mountains with Christ knows how many safeties. Plus, there's always risk vs reward. If there's a major chance it could help reduce dependence on petroleum products and a very minor chance a few hundred to a few thousand people might get irradiated, I say build them. Stick one right in the middle of my neighborhood if they want, I'm game.Originally Posted by ss01
08-31-2005, 09:46 AM
check this out
Amazing, what $2.69 a gallon gas can buy, isn't it?
In case you're wondering where this hotel is, it isn't a hotel at all. It is a house!
It's owned by the family of Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan, the former president of theUnited Arab Emirates and ruler of Abu-Dhabi. Wonder what the CEO of Exxon/Mobil house looks like??
08-31-2005, 09:48 AM
08-31-2005, 10:58 AM
hahahaha-that's crazy!!! Ill do whatever I can to decrease my dependance on petroleum products. First step was getting rid of my truck and buying an Accord. Next summer maybe Ill run all my errands on a motorcycle.
08-31-2005, 11:04 AM
The US is pretty behind and finally now understands what other countries have done for years and years. We want our conveniences and at all costs and when things get harder, we bitch. You all know how it goes... gotta have those cabins and weekend trips hours away, or gotta pull those boats with a truck, or have that room, etc, etc.
Bah, I just bought an SUV a few months ago... but my wife and I carpool to work now and save TONS of money. It's too bad we didn't wake up sooner and demand different cars running on different energy sources. It's also too bad we don't use public transportation nor put the money we should into developing it.
And yeah, I can say that and I'm just as bad as everybody else... but getting better.
Originally Posted by BigVrunga
08-31-2005, 11:24 AM
Yup, those other countries, what champs. Stagnating in socialist nonsensical borderline poverty when their economies could have advanced quite easily and quickly. And what dullards we are for increasing our productivity and available capital to the point where we have tons of leisure time and tons of ways to occupy ourselves during that time. I can't believe how small minded and bitchy we are when we complain every time our government's own meager attempts at destroying our economy affect this horrible tendency of Americans. You'd think we'd have learned by now.Originally Posted by not_big_enuf
Given the success of other government initiatives I don't know why people are so hesitant to let them develop alternative energy. Maybe because tons and tons of resources will be squandered and lost in the process because of the lack of accountability in such programs, but go figure. As for the market delivering such resources, it will when they become more economical compared to the alternatives. I don't get people who complain about high oil/gas prices and then demand more capital be poured into developing alternative energy sources. It's the high price of oil and gas that will spur such research and development. It's the government's constant nudging of the petroleum industry towards a present oriented business model and other interventions that's the main cause of these price fluctuations. If they hadn't been doing that the price of oil would have still fluctuated but would have been a hell of a lot smoother, and were it to finally rise because of diminishing reserves or increasing demand, the same thing would occur. Other resources would become more economical to develop.Bah, I just bought an SUV a few months ago... but my wife and I carpool to work now and save TONS of money. It's too bad we didn't wake up sooner and demand different cars running on different energy sources. It's also too bad we don't use public transportation nor put the money we should into developing it.
In the end there's nothing to admire in this particular situation in the European countries. Their policies are actually quite idiotic.
08-31-2005, 11:38 AM
The point is that we, as the consumer, can't do anything about it so why complain about it? We take for granted that we are on top of the food chain and yes, we have given ourselves every right to have every convenience. Gas prices have been on the rise for years but until it directly hurts us we do little about it.
Sorry, it just irritates me that I hear constant complaints but few do little but keep going to the pumps. We live in a country where we DO get whatever we want and have so much we forget about it. Spoiled? Yep. But at least I realize it.
08-31-2005, 12:31 PM
who told you that? have you ever been to europe in your life?Originally Posted by CDB
not only that, oil (As we know it) will run out at about 2030. lets see you than talk about how we should keep with the oil.
08-31-2005, 12:55 PM
> > Subject: Gas strike! - Sept 1
> > IT HAS BEEN CALCULATED THAT IF EVERYONE IN THE UNITED STATES AND
> > CANADA DID NOT PURCHASE A DROP OF GASOLINE FOR ONE DAY AND ALL AT
> > THE SAME TIME, THE OIL COMPANIES WOULD CHOKE ON THEIR STOCKPILES. AT
> > THE SAME TIME IT WOULD HIT THE ENTIRE INDUSTRY WITH A NET LOSS OF
> > OVER 46 BILLION DOLLARS WHICH AFFECTS THE BOTTOM LINES OF THE OIL
> > COMPANIES. THEREFORE SEPTEMBER 1st HAS BEEN FORMALLY DECLARED "STICK
> > IT TO THEM" DAY AND THE PEOPLE OF THESE TWO NATIONS SHOULD NOT BUY A
> > SINGLE DROP OF GASOLINE THAT DAY. THE ONLY WAY THIS CAN BE DONE IS
> > IF YOU FORWARD THIS E-MAIL TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS YOU CAN AND AS
> > QUICKLY AS YOU CAN TO GET THE WORD OUT. WAITING ON THE GOVERNMENT TO
> > STEP IN AND CONTROL THE PRICES IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. WHAT HAPPENED
> > TO THE REDUCTION AND CONTROL IN PRICES THAT THE ARAB NATIONS
> > PROMISED TWO WEEKS AGO? REMEMBER ONE THING, NOT ONLY IS THE PRICE OF
> > GASOLINE GOING UP BUT AT THE SAME TIME AIRLINES ARE FORCED TO RAISE
> > THEIR PRICES, TRUCKING COMPANIES ARE FORCED TO RAISE THEIR PRICES
> > WHICH AFFECTS PRICES ON EVERYTHING THAT IS SHIPPED. THINGS LIKE
> > FOOD, CLOTHING, BUILDING MATERIALS, MEDICAL SUPPLIES ETC. WHO PAYS
> > IN THE END? WE DO!
> > WE CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE. IF THEY DON'T GET THE MESSAGE AFTER ONE
> > DAY, WE WILL DO IT AGAIN AND AGAIN.
> > SO DO YOUR PART AND SPREAD THE WORD. Â FORWARD THIS EMAIL TO
> > EVERYONE YOU KNOW. MARK YOUR CALENDARS AND MAKE SEPTEMBER 1ST A DAY
> > THAT THE CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA SAY "ENOUGH IS
> > ENOUGH"
Well it's not much but it's better than to take it in the 4ss without saying a word...
08-31-2005, 03:04 PM
Interesting chain mail... sounds like it almost makes sense, but I doubt any complex calculation was actually figured out. Not to mention most people won't participate
Similar Forum Threads
- By MystikalSoul in forum PoliticsReplies: 4Last Post: 12-23-2008, 04:18 PM
- By DGSky in forum General ChatReplies: 74Last Post: 06-16-2008, 10:59 PM
- By SufferingEd in forum SupplementsReplies: 25Last Post: 05-14-2008, 10:29 PM
- By slanginweight in forum General ChatReplies: 68Last Post: 03-18-2008, 07:13 PM
- By anabolicrhino in forum PoliticsReplies: 70Last Post: 07-07-2007, 08:28 AM