Re: Nuclear power

Page 2 of 2  
My suggestion has nothing to do with anybody's opinion on nuclear power. When one talks of nuclear fission and arm growing out of strange places in
relation to nuclear power it is defiantly time for that person to find another subject on which to comment. ;)
mike hunt

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 8 Apr 2006 20:17:11 -0400, "Mike Hunter"

You would ignore the resultant birth defects because you don't happen to like the analogy or way in which I describe a problem? That's pretty narrow minded.
--
Spike
1965 Ford Mustang Fastback 2+2, Vintage Burgundy
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Why you would want to continue to post on the subject of nuclear power when don't not what you are talking about seems rather strange at best. For one to even suggests nuclear power plants lead to birth defects is absurd.
mike hunt
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 9 Apr 2006 12:13:13 -0400, "Mike Hunter"

Why do you want to cover up or ignore the hazards of nuclear power? Perhaps you are not willing to admit to the hazards, preferring to ignore them in a rush for more power at any price; at any risk?
That ignores everything science and medicine have learned over decades about the dangers of exposure to radiation and what it does to cells. It ignores what the Russians have experience as a result of a failure to contain it. It ignores acknowledged leakage into the ground water systems in our own country from the storage of the waste.
The plants themselves do not lead to birth defects, death, etc. But, when there is a failure of the containment system, a price is paid.
You are pro nuke. Fine. I happen to be pro nuke as well because it happens to be the only thing which will, for the foreseeable future, help meet the needs of the globe. Where we differ in recognizing the hazards.
I don't recall having told you that because you do not agree with me you should shut up on the subject. Nor have I intentionally, and I hope not even accidentally, indicated that you are stupid and know nothing about the subject, as you have inferred about me. I don't know about you, but i have had to wear the suit and detector badges, and scrub down. I've spent hours in the classroom being trained for such events. I think I have some knowledge of the subject.

--
Spike
1965 Ford Mustang Fastback 2+2, Vintage Burgundy
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I merely suggest you might want to stop posting on this subject since you opinion about nuclear power is not based on facts..You may know much about nuclear radiation but you know little about the operation of a US nuclear power generating plant, with your wrong headed efforts to connect the two. Disposal of nuclear waste from a power station is indeed a political problem, but it is not a scientific problem If you knew how the pellets are handled after they have served their purpose, you would know that. Your equating nuclear power, as used in a US power generating station, with fusion is ridicules. There could not be a nuclear explosion in a power plant if one wanted to cause one. You are simply adding to the nuclear hysteria in this country buy posting such crap in a NG. With every post you prove you do not know anything about nuclear power as used to produced electricity in the US, or the storage and disposal of the used material.
If you want to know about the safe use of nuclear power, talk to a US sailor. Every submarine and carrier is nuclear steam powered and has been for many years. Talk to the thousands of people that go to work every day in nuclear power plants in the US, France or Japan where the used material is now stored under six foot of water and ask them if they are afraid to go to work. My one son is the Manager of a nuclear power plant, when I showed him some of your posts he just shook his head and said, I know we have been fighting a grossly ill-informed public for years over thirty.
mike hunt
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
If you don't know that nuclear power is used to make the steam to runs a ships turbine engines, and the turbine that runs the generators in a power station, there is no use trying to teach you anything LOL
mike hunt

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 10 Apr 2006 18:32:21 -0400, "Mike Hunter"

And if you don't know the hazards of that propulsion system, talk to the widows and orphans from the submarine Kirsk. And ask any submariner in the US Navy. Ask those who tend those propulsion systems on ships. It may not go wrong often, but when it does it goes very very wrong. Radiation is radiation. It is bad for your health. Consider the use of radiation in the treatment of cancer. The radiation does not pick and choose which cells to destroy. It destroys them all. The question is always whether it gets rid of the cancer before it kills the patient. You just proved your ignorance. There is nothing more to say.
--
Spike
1965 Ford Mustang Fastback 2+2, Vintage Burgundy
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What does Nuclear propulsion have to do with it? It was a Torpeo explosion, not a nuclear accident.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/europe/2000/russian_sub/default.stm

Tell that to cancer patients who are getting radation therapy.

Actually, it kills more rapidly dividing cells, like cancer cells, than cells not dividing rapidly.

While there is no question that steam is generated from the heat in the nuclear reactor, I have never heard it called nuclear steam before.
Jeff

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Clearly you concentrate on the cause and ignore the fears of the reactor leaking and contaminating the ocean. That is what it has to do with it. The explosion could have led to radiation leakage.

By that, we can infer that the atom bombs dropped on Japan prevented added deaths so it was a good thing?

I note that you do not deny that it kills good cells as well as bad. I don't recall at any point indicating that it kills one faster than the other. As for whether it kills the cancer first or the patient, talk to a cancer specialist. Chemo is the same.

I never called it "nuclear steam".

--
Spike
1965 Ford Mustang Fastback 2+2, Vintage Burgundy
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No. Only that radiation can be used for good things.

I know. However, I pointed that out.

Having treated cancer patients, I am quite well aware of that. I have already talked to the cancer specialist.
Jeff

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
It seems you don't know any more about submarines then you know about nuclear power in the US. The Kirsk was not a US submarine and its lost was a result of the mishandling of one of it own torpedoes, not from a failure of its reactor.
mike hunt
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Sorry, but that was a rather idiotic retort. What the heck difference does the nation of origin matter? It's still a nuclear reactor heating water to make steam to drive turbines to create electricity to propel the boat.
While you have concentrated on the accident cause, you have ignored the grave concern of many nations in the region regarding contamination of the ocean. Both the US and Russians have had accidents, and losses with nuclear powered subs; the Russians far more than we. Among those have been reactor leaks which resulted in both death and long term illness. I expect you will ignore them as well.
However, I do enjoy the way you take things out of context and twist them to negate anything which conflicts with your "expert" views, and to cover what appears to be a serious lack of knowledge on your part.
Aside from experience by way the military, I have experience through contacts while doing volunteer work in a hospice and rehab hospital.
On Tue, 11 Apr 2006 11:05:41 -0400, "Mike Hunter"

--
Spike
1965 Ford Mustang Fastback 2+2, Vintage Burgundy
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@snowcrest.net says...

How about the thermal reactors in satellites that fall back to earth?
--
I. Care
Address fake until the SPAM goes away ;-}
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You mean those things which cause such worries in Australia, and Canada? The same reason that environmentalists are so dead set against sending the waste materials to the sun because of the possibility of an accident?
--
Spike
1965 Ford Mustang Fastback 2+2, Vintage Burgundy
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Thank you. Apparently Michael is not as familiar with the history of the nuclear power developments and both it's successes and failures.
I am not against nuclear power. If it goes wrong, we'll all glow together when we glow :0) Hopefully, sometime in the future, a new source which does not have the side effects of nuclear fission will be developed/harnessed.
Personally, I would lean more toward reducing the need for more power. That is, if the globe had far fewer people, there would be far less need for the resources being depleted. Population control is, in my opinion, a far more serious problem than more power production.
At the rate they are increasing the populations of India and China, the earth is going to fall over sideways from the excess weight on that side of the globe. The we'll all have to go buy new wardrobes to meet the needs of the climate change LOL
--
Spike
1965 Ford Mustang Fastback 2+2, Vintage Burgundy
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.