RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 137,895
Posts: 5,330,519
Members: 24,555
Currently online: 591
Newest member: berlyn

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Inquisition
By: Michelle on Jul 12

Cubify Star Trek 3DMe Mini Figurines
By: T'Bonz on Jul 11

Latest Official Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Jul 10

Seven of Nine Bobble Head
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

Pegg The Prankster
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

More Trek Stars Join Unbelievable!!!!!
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

Star Trek #35 Preview
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

New ThinkGeek Trek Apparel
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Star Trek Movie Prop Auction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Drexler: NX Engineering Room Construction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > Science and Technology

Science and Technology "Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known." - Carl Sagan.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old December 26 2013, 03:09 AM   #16
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Has Nuke power just nukedthefridge, worse than 3 Mile Island?

USS Triumphant wrote: View Post
There is some merit in parts of what you are saying - but mostly you seem more interested in an argument over semantics and setting up strawmen moreso than an actual discussion on this subject, so I'll leave you to that.

Happy Holidays.
What strawmen?
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 26 2013, 03:10 AM   #17
USS Triumphant
Rear Admiral
 
USS Triumphant's Avatar
 
Location: Go ahead, caller. I'm listening...
Re: Has Nuke power just nukedthefridge, worse than 3 Mile Island?

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
Nuclear power is safe, dependable and clean (which is the not so surprising reason more Tchernobyls weren't happening), unless you build it in an earthquake region and a tsunami strikes.
Agreed, not to mention the fact that the Soviets thought little things like containment vessels were a waste of money.
__________________
As the brilliant philosopher once said... Everybody, have fun tonight. Everybody, Wang Chung tonight.
USS Triumphant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 26 2013, 10:38 AM   #18
FPAlpha
Rear Admiral
 
FPAlpha's Avatar
 
Location: Mannheim, Germany
Re: Has Nuke power just nukedthefridge, worse than 3 Mile Island?

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
FPAlpha wrote: View Post
Yeah.. what can someone expect when the build nuclear reactors in an area called the Ring of Fire?

Nuclear energy has hailed as the one safe, dependable and clean energy source back then but i'm honestly surprised there weren't more Tchernobyls happening as i grew up (i dimly remember that time period).

It is safe but in order to be so you can't skimp on anything there which drives up costs. At a coal plant no one would lose their shit with a faulty valve or that some procedures may be outdated but given Murphy's Law these small things may be deadly with a nuclear reactor.
Nuclear power is safe, dependable and clean (which is the not so surprising reason more Tchernobyls weren't happening), unless you build it in an earthquake region and a tsunami strikes. Murphy's Law isn't actually a law.

Germany pushing the panic button was ridiculous. There are no earthquakes and tsunami in your country.
I know that Murphy's Law isn't a law but if you build such a dangerous thing in a highly volatile region you are inviting trouble.

And i agree with Germany's overreaction but this happens all the time around the world where people go into panic mode and politicians scramble to do anything to appease them.. unfortunately it was election time during that period and the Green Party had a huge boost because of that (they lost much of it in the years that followed and returned to their normal lebel for the general elections this year).
__________________
"A control freak like you with something you can't control? No no.. that's gonna be more fun than shark week!" Det. Javier Esposito
FPAlpha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 26 2013, 12:41 PM   #19
Edit_XYZ
Fleet Captain
 
Edit_XYZ's Avatar
 
Location: At star's end.
Re: Has Nuke power just nukedthefridge, worse than 3 Mile Island?

TheMasterOfOrion
FPAlpha

Before coming up with straw-men to justify that nuclear power has 'jumped the shark', you should look up the facts:
The plain fact is that per megawatt-hour of power generated, nuclear power causes fewer deaths than any other way of making electricity bar none. Coal kills nearly 2,000 times as many people; bioenergy 50 times; gas 40 times; hydro 15 times; solar five times and even wind nearly twice as many as nuclear. That’s including Chernobyl and Fukushima - both based on obsolete, unsafe designs by comparison with the current ones:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamescon...-paid/?r44b=no
Be sure to look up the references given at the end of the article, too - for verification purposes (a habit you REALLY need to acquire).

It is clear that increasing the cost and the time to build a plant by at least ten times over the past 40 years has merely made a very, very safe system into a very, very, very safe system.
Of course, the excessive regulations implemented around nuclear power drove everyone away from nuclear power and into far less safe, far deadlier energy sources.
__________________
"Let truth and falsehood grapple ... Truth is strong" - John Milton
Edit_XYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 26 2013, 01:44 PM   #20
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Has Nuke power just nukedthefridge, worse than 3 Mile Island?

Edit_XYZ wrote: View Post
Before coming up with straw-men to justify that nuclear power has 'jumped the shark'
And what straw-men are you referring to?
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 26 2013, 02:00 PM   #21
Edit_XYZ
Fleet Captain
 
Edit_XYZ's Avatar
 
Location: At star's end.
Re: Has Nuke power just nukedthefridge, worse than 3 Mile Island?

Coach Comet

Have you even read the first 2 posts of this thread?
You think using some isolated stories in order to turn nuclear power into the boogey-man, while pretending/failing to research the relevant data, is not using straw-men for said purpose? If so - lol.

Also, don't think it's not obvious how you tried to avoid the substance of my previous post - the actual statistical data, as opposed to alarmistic anecdotes, showing nuclear power to be safer, by far, than all other energy generating methods.


PS - I see irrelevant semantic hair-splitting has been your hallmark throughout this thread.
So, do tell - what are your reasons for opposing nuclear power? Clearly, without irrelevant detours or attacking the other poster as replacements for actual arguments.
__________________
"Let truth and falsehood grapple ... Truth is strong" - John Milton

Last edited by Edit_XYZ; December 26 2013 at 02:17 PM.
Edit_XYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 26 2013, 02:24 PM   #22
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Has Nuke power just nukedthefridge, worse than 3 Mile Island?

Edit_XYZ wrote: View Post
Coach Comet

Have you even read the first 2 posts of this thread?
You think using some isolated stories while pretending the rest of the data does not exist, in order to turn nuclear power into the boogeyman is not using straw-men for said purpose? If so - lol.
Focussing on one's priorities is not the same as making a straw man fallacy. Some people want to save lives, some people want to save money, some people want to maximize power production, some people want to maximize sustainability, some people don't want shit in their back yard, and so forth.

A straw man fallacy occurs when someone misrepresents an opponent's position and then erroneously claims that defeating the misrepresentation equals defeating the opponent's position. If it's not the case that all those things have occurred, then it's not the case that a straw man fallacy, as such, has been made.

People have different definitions of utility that they want to see maximized. Not agreeing on which utility function should be applied is part of the debate, and itself is far from evidence of a proliferation of straw men.

I'll keep it simple. Please name just one specific example of a straw man fallacy occurring in the first 2 posts of this thread. I want to see where you're coming from.

@ USS Triumphant: Contrary to your assertion, I am interested in discussion. I'd at least like to hear where you think I've made a straw man fallacy, because if I did that, then that deserves to be corrected.

Edit_XYZ wrote: View Post
PS - I see irrelevant semantic hair-splitting has been your hallmark throughout this thread.
Really, where did I do that?
So, do tell - what are your reasons for opposing nuclear power?
Where did I say that I don't want any nuclear power at all?

Clearly, without irrelevant detours or attacking the other poster as replacements for actual arguments.
Where have I gone down irrelevant detours, or attacked other posters, at all, and in particular in lieu of actual arguments?
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 26 2013, 02:28 PM   #23
Edit_XYZ
Fleet Captain
 
Edit_XYZ's Avatar
 
Location: At star's end.
Re: Has Nuke power just nukedthefridge, worse than 3 Mile Island?

Coach Comet

As said - lol.

Also - I see you still failed to tell what are your reasons for opposing nuclear power. Clearly, without irrelevant detours or attacking the other poster as replacements for actual arguments.
Indeed, your posts contain only obfuscating filler - mostly semantic hair-splitting.

And, of course, you keep staying well clear of any actual data.
__________________
"Let truth and falsehood grapple ... Truth is strong" - John Milton
Edit_XYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 26 2013, 02:36 PM   #24
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Has Nuke power just nukedthefridge, worse than 3 Mile Island?

Edit_XYZ wrote: View Post
Coach Comet

As said - lol.

Also - I see you still failed to tell what are your reasons for opposing nuclear power. Clearly, without irrelevant detours or attacking the other poster as replacements for actual arguments.
Indeed, your posts contain only obfuscating filler - mostly semantic hair-splitting.

And, of course, you keep staying well clear of any actual data.
Well, you've misrepresented my position, which is:

Coach Comet wrote: View Post
Frankly, I think that we're going to need to solve the energy crisis long before nuclear power could be workable in the US on any significantly larger scale than where it's at. I consider that a strong argument against going down the path to drastically expand nuclear power production.
I don't oppose nuclear power; I oppose drastically increasing its production. I mean, I even said so right there.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 26 2013, 02:39 PM   #25
Edit_XYZ
Fleet Captain
 
Edit_XYZ's Avatar
 
Location: At star's end.
Re: Has Nuke power just nukedthefridge, worse than 3 Mile Island?

Coach Comet

Fine.

What are your reasons for opposing increasing nuclear power use - opting, instead, for halting economic growth*, throwing or keeping hundreds of millions of humans in abject poverty?
State your reasons clearly, without irrelevant detours or attacking the other poster as replacements for actual arguments.

And do incorporate actual data into your posts.

*If that is still not your position - then, by all means, do tell exactly what your position is.
__________________
"Let truth and falsehood grapple ... Truth is strong" - John Milton

Last edited by Edit_XYZ; December 26 2013 at 08:10 PM.
Edit_XYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 26 2013, 09:27 PM   #26
gturner
Admiral
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Has Nuke power just nukedthefridge, worse than 3 Mile Island?

Every knew megawatt from a nuclear power plant removes the need for that megawatt to come from coal, gas, or a whirling bird chopper, and does so for the next forty years. After the 1973 oil crisis, France dedicated itself to going nuclear, and not long after that nuclear provided almost the entirety of France's electricity.
gturner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 28 2013, 10:28 PM   #27
publiusr
Commodore
 
Re: Has Nuke power just nukedthefridge, worse than 3 Mile Island?

Well said.

Something to consider.

A failure in Japan or in Russia shows sub-standard design--that is what kills. Three- Mile was well contained and nothing compared to the other two. There are meltdown proof reactors like the self limiting TRIGA designs. Thorium is all the rage, as are pebble-bed designs, other designs that use less water.

To use previous disasters to attack nuclear energy as an overall concept is rather like saying Airbus shouldn't build an A-350 because a biplane broke up due to bailing wire snapping.

Right now, we have forests of ICBMs all over the planet. Fissile material is surrounded by high explosives for the purpose of implosion, and sitting atop solid fuel in the US, or worse, corrosive hypergolics in the USSR.

Now we are going to have to do something with this material anyway. Get it off the ICBMs, separate with rods to moderate neutrons, and store in other concrete and steel enclosures, and maybe put water on it to keep it cool.

Guess what--I have just described 90% or a typical nuclear power plant. So you might as well put the turbine on it to get some good out of it. Anti-nukes are causing the threat by not supporting newer reactor concepts to allow older ones to be phased out prior to an earthquake, tsunami, etc.

There is talk of earthquake cloaks. You build that into the design. Many buildings float on bearings. You do that with the whole reactor, so that cracks/leaks don't propagate, nixing any problems with spills.

Japans crisis was one of slow motion. Had they just put the generators higher up, or had some pumper trucks, the problem even with those antiquated designs would have been averted.

The worst was COZMO. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcM1QPhbjJM

When any combustable fuel plant is involved in a quake, there is instant explosion risk and immediate thermal radiation.We just had something similar here in Birmingham Alabama in the Gate City explosion:
http://www.alabamas13.com/story/2425...-gas-explosion

Rational heads understand all this in Japan
http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/12/jap...o-nuclear.html

Right now, there are radioactive elements in smoke detectors. Now I guess if you broke one apart, taped it inside your underwear, and wore it close to your 'nads for 20 years, yes you may--or may not-get cancer.


But if you don't keep fresh batteries in your detector and there is a fire--a much greater risk--you are toast. Some detectors also serve to measure Carbon monoxide, like what killed Weird Al's parents.


Rickover's Nuclear Navy runs every day and mostly without incident--and atomic power combined with a mandate of all electric cars would drastically reduce CO2--and doesn't chop up birds.


Look, right now there are warheads all over. We have to do something with these things anyway. Well, right now, some of our cities are powered with what used to be warheads aimed at these cities:

http://www.dailyprogress.com/news/do...9bb30f31a.html


I think that is a good thing.

More:
http://xkcd.com/radiation/ http://what-if.xkcd.com/29/
publiusr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old December 29 2013, 12:05 AM   #28
Mooch
Fleet Captain
 
Mooch's Avatar
 
Location: Canada
Re: Has Nuke power just nukedthefridge, worse than 3 Mile Island?

If there is a silver lining to nuclear incidents such as Fukushima, it's that each event highlights areas that other existing plants can be improved, further reducing the chance of such things happening again. I know there were a lot of improvements made at plants in Ontario due to Fukushima, even though that particular situation is extremely unlikely to occur here.

USS Triumphant wrote: View Post
2. We're running plants designed to run safely for 40 years for 50 years or more - some are at 55 right now.
This is true, but that's mainly due to the fact that the people that designed the plants originally didn't really know how long they would last, and they turned out to have under-estimated. It may in fact turn out to be the case that plants can last essentially indefinitely, as long as parts are continually replaced as they age. This process is just beginning here in Ontario, but results so far have been encouraging. 2 reactors have been refurbished to provide an additional 20 years of run time, and 10 more are planned to be upgraded over the next 15 years or so.
Mooch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 29 2013, 12:28 AM   #29
Davros
Fleet Admiral
 
Davros's Avatar
 
Location: Kaled bunker, Skaro
Re: Has Nuke power just nukedthefridge, worse than 3 Mile Island?

All US domestic electricity needs can be met with renewable sources. There is no need to take the risk of further expansion of nuclear energy and the burden of the waste products it produces.
__________________
"Taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society," -Oliver Wendell Holmes
Davros is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 29 2013, 04:39 AM   #30
gturner
Admiral
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Has Nuke power just nukedthefridge, worse than 3 Mile Island?

Mooch wrote: View Post
If there is a silver lining to nuclear incidents such as Fukushima, it's that each event highlights areas that other existing plants can be improved, further reducing the chance of such things happening again.
What's kind of ironic is that a much earlier generation of engineers, if faced with the task of assuring power to an overheating reactor, would've naturally used the steam from the reactor to power the pumps, instead of the diesel generators used in that particular design. You couldn't imagine an engineer from 1890 standing next to a hissing high pressure steam pipe, scratching his head about where to get a source of power.
gturner is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
accidents, energy, fukushima, nuclear, oil

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:51 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.