Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: The nuclear power sky is falling...
7 views
Skip to first unread message
Message has been deleted
David Spain
Feb 10, 2012, 8:24:32 AM2/10/12
to
Fred J. McCall wrote:
> Gee, they're building two new reactors in Georgia (the first in three
> decades in the US).
>
Yup,
http://money.cnn.com/2012/02/09/news/economy/nuclear_reactors/index.htm
The green people can't seem to decide what is worse, AGW or Nukes.
I suppose we could all give up modern life and life in a Yurt:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yurt
But then those of us who did not die off from horrible diseases would not know
about the threat we pose to the Earth thanks to no longer having it told to us
daily on the Internet(s).
Dave
> Gee, they're building two new reactors in Georgia (the first in three
> decades in the US).
>
Yup,
http://money.cnn.com/2012/02/09/news/economy/nuclear_reactors/index.htm
The green people can't seem to decide what is worse, AGW or Nukes.
I suppose we could all give up modern life and life in a Yurt:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yurt
But then those of us who did not die off from horrible diseases would not know
about the threat we pose to the Earth thanks to no longer having it told to us
daily on the Internet(s).
Dave
bob haller
Feb 10, 2012, 8:58:27 AM2/10/12
to
On Feb 10, 7:14 am, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Gee, they're building two new reactors in Georgia (the first in three
> decades in the US).
>
> So much for Bobbert's "Fukishima will kill nuclear power" sky is
> Gee, they're building two new reactors in Georgia (the first in three
> decades in the US).
>
> falling rant...
>
> --
> "Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to
> live in the real world."
> -- Mary Shafer, NASA Dryden
The feds approved it but that doesnt mean it will be built. Just wait
for the lawsuits to begin, there are now enough people concerned about
nuke power to stall any new plant....:)
bob haller
Feb 10, 2012, 11:55:51 AM2/10/12
to
> The feds approved it but that doesnt mean it will be built. Just wait
> for the lawsuits to begin, there are now enough people concerned about
> nuke power to stall any new plant....:)
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
bob haller
Feb 10, 2012, 3:58:38 PM2/10/12
to
On Feb 10, 2:41 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >http://energy.aol.com/2012/02/09/new-nuclear-plants-under-cost-deadli...
>
> Bobbert replying to himself and failing to understand that his link is
> concerned about MONEY, not safety of nuclear power.
>
> Phew, what a loony....
>
> --
> "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
> man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
> all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
> --George Bernard Shaw
all lawsuits, investigations etc will delay construction and may
increase costs so much the plants will lose money.
heck years ago a partially constructed nuke plant was scrapped, for
fiancial reasons
>
> Bobbert replying to himself and failing to understand that his link is
> concerned about MONEY, not safety of nuclear power.
>
> Phew, what a loony....
>
> --
> "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
> man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
> all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
> --George Bernard Shaw
all lawsuits, investigations etc will delay construction and may
increase costs so much the plants will lose money.
heck years ago a partially constructed nuke plant was scrapped, for
fiancial reasons
Message has been deleted
bob haller
Feb 10, 2012, 4:15:06 PM2/10/12
to
On Feb 10, 4:07 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> bob haller <hall...@aol.com> wrote:
> >On Feb 10, 2:41 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> bob haller <hall...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> The feds approved it but that doesnt mean it will be built. Just wait
> >> >> for the lawsuits to begin, there are now enough people concerned about
> >> >> nuke power to stall any new plant....:)
>
> >> >http://energy.aol.com/2012/02/09/new-nuclear-plants-under-cost-deadli...
>
> >> Bobbert replying to himself and failing to understand that his link is
> >> concerned about MONEY, not safety of nuclear power.
>
> >> Phew, what a loony....
>
> bob haller <hall...@aol.com> wrote:
> >On Feb 10, 2:41 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> bob haller <hall...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> The feds approved it but that doesnt mean it will be built. Just wait
> >> >> for the lawsuits to begin, there are now enough people concerned about
> >> >> nuke power to stall any new plant....:)
>
> >> >http://energy.aol.com/2012/02/09/new-nuclear-plants-under-cost-deadli...
>
> >> Bobbert replying to himself and failing to understand that his link is
> >> concerned about MONEY, not safety of nuclear power.
>
> >> Phew, what a loony....
>
> >all lawsuits, investigations etc will delay construction and may
> >increase costs so much the plants will lose money.
>
> >heck years ago a partially constructed nuke plant was scrapped, for
> >fiancial reasons
>
> So the danger isn't nuclear power at all? It's obstructionist morons
> >increase costs so much the plants will lose money.
>
> >heck years ago a partially constructed nuke plant was scrapped, for
> >fiancial reasons
>
> like you?
>
> --
> "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
> man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
> all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
> --George Bernard Shaw- Hide quoted text -
> --
> "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
> man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
> all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
>
> - Show quoted text -
no its a power source that can and has killed whole areas of our
planet...
all of the accidents were preventable, but not handled safely.
plus they are a top terrorist target
Message has been deleted
Brad Guth
Feb 10, 2012, 5:23:49 PM2/10/12
to
There are valid alternatives to hydrocarbons, not that we need to
entirely give up on our addiction to using hydrocarbons.
Thorium as a Secure Nuclear Fuel Alternative / Journal of Energy
Security
http://www.ensec.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=187%3athorium-as-a-secure-nuclear-fuel-alternative&catid=94:0409content&Itemid=342
“Thorium is not new technology, but rather, it is as old as the
nuclear age itself, with research ongoing since its inception. The
first nuclear reactors in America and Russia were fuelled by thorium.
It was then dismissed by policy-makers – the key reason being that the
thorium fuel cycle provides no opportunity for obtaining bomb
materials. The 21st Century is a different era than the Cold War
era. The Obama Administration has recently announced its goal to rid
the entire world of nuclear weapons while it must confront both energy
and environmental crises. Fossil fuels are expensive and experience
wildly volatile price fluctuations. Uranium is in dangerously short
supply. The world was not ready for thorium in the 1950s. Thorium
could not be more appropriate now.”
Thorium is still offering the most failsafe nuclear energy amplifier,
and it’s rather abundant, cheap to obtain, already at 100% purity as
is, and it’s fission process can be fully controlled on demand. Once
spent, with minimal processing it’s either reusable as is or nearly
daycare approved for sandbox use.
Our resident newsgroup rednecks and their usual Big Energy as well as
public-funded army of brown-nosed clowns, minions and FUD-masters are
of course hired and instructed to topic/author stalk and trash or
discredit anyone suggesting the better alternatives for using thorium
as reactor fuel. From K-12 on we’re being continually duped into
believing that only uranium and MOX fueled reactors are the way to go,
as we’ll as we get to pay for everything at least ten fold greater
cost than using thorium.
Failsafe thorium reactors or problematic MOX doom and gloom reactors:
Thorium mining, processing, reactor fueling, easily controlled fuel
burning, fuel replenishments, secondary purifying or spent fuel
filtering (on the fly as needed), including spent fuel disposal
management gets down to being practically insignificant compared to
the complex and risky issues of using uranium and MOX alternatives, as
well as reactor meltdowns easily eliminated, along with absolute
minimal environmental impacts and practically zilch worth of WMD or
terrorists issues are all way safer and cheaper, entirely less
problematic and about as freaking failsafe as any form of truly clean
energy gets.
Why are the mainstream ZNRs and their usual redneck army of FUD-
masters always opposed to reducing the average electric energy rate
that customers are paying, to roughly 10% or one cent/kwhr for
reliably clean and essentially renewable energy?
Are they suggesting Earth doesn't have enough thorium, and otherwise
needs all the plutonium plus other nasty elements it can possibly get?
Are they further suggesting that our national power grids simply can’t
be greatly improved and expanded?
The all inclusive (birth to grave) cost of conventional uranium and/or
MOX fueled reactors is costing us at least ten fold more than going
with thorium fueled reactors. So what the hell gives with that?
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
entirely give up on our addiction to using hydrocarbons.
Thorium as a Secure Nuclear Fuel Alternative / Journal of Energy
Security
http://www.ensec.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=187%3athorium-as-a-secure-nuclear-fuel-alternative&catid=94:0409content&Itemid=342
“Thorium is not new technology, but rather, it is as old as the
nuclear age itself, with research ongoing since its inception. The
first nuclear reactors in America and Russia were fuelled by thorium.
It was then dismissed by policy-makers – the key reason being that the
thorium fuel cycle provides no opportunity for obtaining bomb
materials. The 21st Century is a different era than the Cold War
era. The Obama Administration has recently announced its goal to rid
the entire world of nuclear weapons while it must confront both energy
and environmental crises. Fossil fuels are expensive and experience
wildly volatile price fluctuations. Uranium is in dangerously short
supply. The world was not ready for thorium in the 1950s. Thorium
could not be more appropriate now.”
Thorium is still offering the most failsafe nuclear energy amplifier,
and it’s rather abundant, cheap to obtain, already at 100% purity as
is, and it’s fission process can be fully controlled on demand. Once
spent, with minimal processing it’s either reusable as is or nearly
daycare approved for sandbox use.
Our resident newsgroup rednecks and their usual Big Energy as well as
public-funded army of brown-nosed clowns, minions and FUD-masters are
of course hired and instructed to topic/author stalk and trash or
discredit anyone suggesting the better alternatives for using thorium
as reactor fuel. From K-12 on we’re being continually duped into
believing that only uranium and MOX fueled reactors are the way to go,
as we’ll as we get to pay for everything at least ten fold greater
cost than using thorium.
Failsafe thorium reactors or problematic MOX doom and gloom reactors:
Thorium mining, processing, reactor fueling, easily controlled fuel
burning, fuel replenishments, secondary purifying or spent fuel
filtering (on the fly as needed), including spent fuel disposal
management gets down to being practically insignificant compared to
the complex and risky issues of using uranium and MOX alternatives, as
well as reactor meltdowns easily eliminated, along with absolute
minimal environmental impacts and practically zilch worth of WMD or
terrorists issues are all way safer and cheaper, entirely less
problematic and about as freaking failsafe as any form of truly clean
energy gets.
Why are the mainstream ZNRs and their usual redneck army of FUD-
masters always opposed to reducing the average electric energy rate
that customers are paying, to roughly 10% or one cent/kwhr for
reliably clean and essentially renewable energy?
Are they suggesting Earth doesn't have enough thorium, and otherwise
needs all the plutonium plus other nasty elements it can possibly get?
Are they further suggesting that our national power grids simply can’t
be greatly improved and expanded?
The all inclusive (birth to grave) cost of conventional uranium and/or
MOX fueled reactors is costing us at least ten fold more than going
with thorium fueled reactors. So what the hell gives with that?
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
Message has been deleted
Brad Guth
Feb 10, 2012, 5:23:14 PM2/10/12
to
On Feb 10, 5:58 am, bob haller <hall...@aol.com> wrote:
At $.25/kwhr by the time those eventually get online, they might as
well go for it.
well go for it.
bob haller
Feb 10, 2012, 8:46:31 PM2/10/12
to
> >no its a power source that can and has killed whole areas of our
> >planet...
>
> areas of our planet".
Look at the no humans live in zones around chernobyl and
fukushima...........
Chernobyls is about 50 miles, fukushima less, if japan used russias
zone of exclusion some of toyko would have to be evacuated.
some of the storage pools at fukushima boiled dry, and caught on
fire.
cleaning up the mess is now estimated as 50 years and the japanes
government will have to pay much of the costs, tepco the power company
lacks the ability to pay
bob haller
Feb 10, 2012, 8:48:27 PM2/10/12
to
> So you keep saying. So, just how many terrorist attacks on nuclear
> reactors have there been, Bobbert? How much radiation leakage from
> terrorist attacks has occurred?
>
> Take your time and think about it....
terrorists have worked in US plants.
all it will take is ONE successful attack to end the industry as we
know it
bob haller
Feb 10, 2012, 8:52:57 PM2/10/12
to
bob haller
Feb 10, 2012, 8:50:20 PM2/10/12
to
Nuke power would be fine if even if plant melted down the plant would
not leak at all.......
no off gasing no radiation leaks at all
not leak at all.......
no off gasing no radiation leaks at all
Jonathan
Feb 10, 2012, 10:29:43 PM2/10/12
to
"Fred J. McCall" <fjmc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:he2aj7hvsqgn9ecln...@4ax.com...
> Gee, they're building two new reactors in Georgia (the first in three
> decades in the US).
>
> So much for Bobbert's "Fukishima will kill nuclear power" sky is
> falling rant...
Only 2? Even though....
> decades in the US).
>
> So much for Bobbert's "Fukishima will kill nuclear power" sky is
> falling rant...
"The Energy Policy Act of 2005 provides loan guarantees of up
to 80% of a project's cost and a production tax credit of 1.8 cents
per kilowatt hour for new nuclear capacity beginning operation
by 2020. The tax credit is specified for the first 8 years of
operation and is limited to $125 million per gigawatt per year."
"This act has spurred applications for new plants to the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission. However, their high capital cost is still
an impediment to the deployment of these plants.
Some examples include:...."
http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/energy-overview/nuclear-2/
I'd say it's as close to dead as possible, without
actually being dead.
trigonometry1972@gmail.com |
Feb 11, 2012, 12:30:40 AM2/11/12
to
On Feb 10, 2:49 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> --
> "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
> only stupid."
> -- Heinrich Heine
Gee. There is already the tech to make a hydrogen fuel cell
vehicle that can go 430 miles on a fill up. And the Chinese are
working on nuclear tech to make hydrogen.
Connect the dots and nuclear power some personal transport
in the future without using a nickel hydride battery.
http://www.eoearth.org/article/Hydrogen_production_from_nuclear_power
http://www.renewableenergyfocus.com/view/3653/toyota-hybrid-fuel-cell-vehicle-achieves-430-mile-range/
Some of the newer designs of reactor look much better but
the stupid and the unexpected do happen. Nuclear has made
some nasty messes. You need to live next door to Fukushima.
Some can do types especially in the nuclear field (IMO) are one of
main
reasons not to do nuclear.
Nuclear power is needed for human deep space exploration........Trig
> Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >There are valid alternatives to hydrocarbons, not that we need to
> >entirely give up on our addiction to using hydrocarbons.
>
> >Thorium as a Secure Nuclear Fuel Alternative / Journal of Energy
> >Security
>
> Yeah? Try using THAT as a motor fuel.
> >There are valid alternatives to hydrocarbons, not that we need to
> >entirely give up on our addiction to using hydrocarbons.
>
> >Thorium as a Secure Nuclear Fuel Alternative / Journal of Energy
> >Security
>
>
> --
> "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
> only stupid."
> -- Heinrich Heine
Gee. There is already the tech to make a hydrogen fuel cell
vehicle that can go 430 miles on a fill up. And the Chinese are
working on nuclear tech to make hydrogen.
Connect the dots and nuclear power some personal transport
in the future without using a nickel hydride battery.
http://www.eoearth.org/article/Hydrogen_production_from_nuclear_power
http://www.renewableenergyfocus.com/view/3653/toyota-hybrid-fuel-cell-vehicle-achieves-430-mile-range/
Some of the newer designs of reactor look much better but
the stupid and the unexpected do happen. Nuclear has made
some nasty messes. You need to live next door to Fukushima.
Some can do types especially in the nuclear field (IMO) are one of
main
reasons not to do nuclear.
Nuclear power is needed for human deep space exploration........Trig
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
bob haller
Feb 11, 2012, 10:05:51 AM2/11/12
to
On Feb 11, 2:54 am, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> bob haller <hall...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> bob haller <hall...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> would seem your answer is, "There have been zero terrorist attacks on
> nuclear reactors and no radiation leakage from terrorist attacks have
> ever occurred, Fred. I guess I was just engaging in my usual penchant
> for hyperbolic lying when I said that they are the top terrorist
> target".
>
> --
> "False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the
> soul with evil."
> -- Socrates
nope we have created a absolute best target for terrorists by locating
plants near major metropoltian areas.
the plant near new york city would displace 8 million people if it
melted down. the trouble is its impossible to evacuate that many
people safely, many would be exposed to high radiation levels......
the economic impact to our country would be staggering.
theres no insurance for a event of that size. the feds would bear the
costs.
and let me add terrorists would never fly a commerciall airliner into
a skyscraper, clearly thats impossible
Brad Guth
Feb 11, 2012, 2:08:15 PM2/11/12
to
most of us to our knees.
Brad Guth
Feb 11, 2012, 2:16:44 PM2/11/12
to
: On Feb 10, 2:48 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
HTP and quality synfuel hydrocarbons from coal can be easily achieved
at minimal pollution.
William Mook can help, whereas you and others of your mainstream sucky
kind got nothing.
I'll provide those 50% efficient fuel cells, and I'll provide a very
small but extremely powerful duel fuel turbine engine for all types of
transports that'll generate minimal CO2 and zero NOx, as well as H2O2
battery hybrids.
> Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >There are valid alternatives to hydrocarbons, not that we need to
> >entirely give up on our addiction to using hydrocarbons.
>
> >Thorium as a Secure Nuclear Fuel Alternative / Journal of Energy
> >Security
>
> >There are valid alternatives to hydrocarbons, not that we need to
> >entirely give up on our addiction to using hydrocarbons.
>
> >Thorium as a Secure Nuclear Fuel Alternative / Journal of Energy
> >Security
>
> Yeah? Try using THAT as a motor fuel.
>
> --
> "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
> only stupid."
> -- Heinrich Heine
With clean, cheap and reliable energy, all sorts of LH2, LOx, H2O2 as
>
> --
> "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
> only stupid."
> -- Heinrich Heine
HTP and quality synfuel hydrocarbons from coal can be easily achieved
at minimal pollution.
William Mook can help, whereas you and others of your mainstream sucky
kind got nothing.
I'll provide those 50% efficient fuel cells, and I'll provide a very
small but extremely powerful duel fuel turbine engine for all types of
transports that'll generate minimal CO2 and zero NOx, as well as H2O2
battery hybrids.
Brad Guth
Feb 11, 2012, 2:17:49 PM2/11/12
to
On Feb 10, 9:30 pm, "trigonometry1...@gmail.com |"
<trigonometry1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 10, 2:49 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >There are valid alternatives to hydrocarbons, not that we need to
> > >entirely give up on our addiction to using hydrocarbons.
>
> > >Thorium as a Secure Nuclear Fuel Alternative / Journal of Energy
> > >Security
>
> > Yeah? Try using THAT as a motor fuel.
>
> > --
> > "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
> > only stupid."
> > -- Heinrich Heine
>
> Gee. There is already the tech to make a hydrogen fuel cell
> vehicle that can go 430 miles on a fill up. And the Chinese are
> working on nuclear tech to make hydrogen.
> Connect the dots and nuclear power some personal transport
> in the future without using a nickel hydride battery.
>
> http://www.eoearth.org/article/Hydrogen_production_from_nuclear_powerhttp://www.renewableenergyfocus.com/view/3653/toyota-hybrid-fuel-cell...
> On Feb 10, 2:49 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >There are valid alternatives to hydrocarbons, not that we need to
> > >entirely give up on our addiction to using hydrocarbons.
>
> > >Thorium as a Secure Nuclear Fuel Alternative / Journal of Energy
> > >Security
>
> > Yeah? Try using THAT as a motor fuel.
>
> > --
> > "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
> > only stupid."
> > -- Heinrich Heine
>
> Gee. There is already the tech to make a hydrogen fuel cell
> vehicle that can go 430 miles on a fill up. And the Chinese are
> working on nuclear tech to make hydrogen.
> Connect the dots and nuclear power some personal transport
> in the future without using a nickel hydride battery.
>
>
> Some of the newer designs of reactor look much better but
> the stupid and the unexpected do happen. Nuclear has made
> some nasty messes. You need to live next door to Fukushima.
> Some can do types especially in the nuclear field (IMO) are one of
> main
> reasons not to do nuclear.
>
> Nuclear power is needed for human deep space exploration........Trig
Fred runs only on raw hydrocarbons, and the more polluting the better.
> Some of the newer designs of reactor look much better but
> the stupid and the unexpected do happen. Nuclear has made
> some nasty messes. You need to live next door to Fukushima.
> Some can do types especially in the nuclear field (IMO) are one of
> main
> reasons not to do nuclear.
>
> Nuclear power is needed for human deep space exploration........Trig
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Brad Guth
Feb 11, 2012, 2:21:41 PM2/11/12
to
No source of energy, including hydroelectric, wind or solar is 100%
failsafe nor having zero environment impact. But then living as naked
humans in caves isn't exactly failsafe.
bob haller
Feb 11, 2012, 5:15:29 PM2/11/12
to
http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/society.html
fukashima reactor is heating up again. apparently cold shutdown hasnt
been reached
fukashima reactor is heating up again. apparently cold shutdown hasnt
been reached
trigonometry1972@gmail.com |
Feb 11, 2012, 5:17:25 PM2/11/12
to
On Feb 11, 11:30 am, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >: On Feb 10, 2:48 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >There are valid alternatives to hydrocarbons, not that we need to
> >> >entirely give up on our addiction to using hydrocarbons.
>
> >> >Thorium as a Secure Nuclear Fuel Alternative / Journal of Energy
> >> >Security
>
> >> Yeah? Try using THAT as a motor fuel.
>
> Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >: On Feb 10, 2:48 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >There are valid alternatives to hydrocarbons, not that we need to
> >> >entirely give up on our addiction to using hydrocarbons.
>
> >> >Thorium as a Secure Nuclear Fuel Alternative / Journal of Energy
> >> >Security
>
> >> Yeah? Try using THAT as a motor fuel.
>
> >With clean, cheap and reliable energy, all sorts of LH2, LOx, H2O2 as
> >HTP and quality synfuel hydrocarbons from coal can be easily achieved
> >at minimal pollution.
>
> What a load of ignorant rubbish.
> >HTP and quality synfuel hydrocarbons from coal can be easily achieved
> >at minimal pollution.
>
>
>
>
> >William Mook can help, whereas you and others of your mainstream sucky
> >kind got nothing.
>
> <snerk>
>
>
> >William Mook can help, whereas you and others of your mainstream sucky
> >kind got nothing.
>
>
>
>
> >I'll provide those 50% efficient fuel cells, and I'll provide a very
> >small but extremely powerful duel fuel turbine engine for all types of
> >transports that'll generate minimal CO2 and zero NOx, as well as H2O2
> >battery hybrids.
>
> You're a Usenet loon. You can barely manage masturbation in your
>
>
> >I'll provide those 50% efficient fuel cells, and I'll provide a very
> >small but extremely powerful duel fuel turbine engine for all types of
> >transports that'll generate minimal CO2 and zero NOx, as well as H2O2
> >battery hybrids.
>
> mother's basement.
>
> --
> "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
> only stupid."
> -- Heinrich Heine
Loons live in the attic. Its old trolls like yourself that live in
> --
> "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
> only stupid."
> -- Heinrich Heine
the basement on the charity of an ex-wife ;-).
And it is a fair bet both of you hold distant records of the
other score.
See you on the track if you're not back to a walker yet
again..............Trig
bob haller
Feb 11, 2012, 6:48:30 PM2/11/12
to
On Feb 11, 5:17 pm, "trigonometry1...@gmail.com |"
> again..............Trig- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Temperature inside No.2 reactor rises again
Tokyo Electric Power Company says the temperature inside the No.2
reactor at the damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant has risen
again.
The utility successfully lowered the temperature last week after
injecting more water.
But a thermometer installed at the bottom of the reactor detected an
increase to around 71 degrees Celsius from Friday night to Saturday
morning.
Two other thermometers in a different place on the reactor bottom kept
on showing 35 degrees Celsius.
TEPCO says it will continue to monitor the situation closely as it
believes the reactor is in a state of cold shutdown. But the utility
says it will consider pouring more water in if the temperature rises
further.
Saturday, February 11, 2012 21:59 +0900 (JST)
>
> - Show quoted text -
Temperature inside No.2 reactor rises again
Tokyo Electric Power Company says the temperature inside the No.2
reactor at the damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant has risen
again.
The utility successfully lowered the temperature last week after
injecting more water.
But a thermometer installed at the bottom of the reactor detected an
increase to around 71 degrees Celsius from Friday night to Saturday
morning.
Two other thermometers in a different place on the reactor bottom kept
on showing 35 degrees Celsius.
TEPCO says it will continue to monitor the situation closely as it
believes the reactor is in a state of cold shutdown. But the utility
says it will consider pouring more water in if the temperature rises
further.
Saturday, February 11, 2012 21:59 +0900 (JST)
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
trigonometry1972@gmail.com |
Feb 12, 2012, 2:11:06 AM2/12/12
to
On Feb 11, 7:09 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Sorry to disappoint you, but I have a fairly nice house, a Mercedes
> and a Buick in the garage, and make more than the ex-wife.
> four inches shorter...
So we know your age now at least your mental age.
>
>
>
> >See you on the track if you're not back to a walker yet
> >again..............Trig
>
> You lot will gibber on, won't you?
An you insult on, it suggests thats all your "good" for.
Drop that Pepsi and bag of chips and go out into
the sunlight.
> "trigonometry1...@gmail.com |" <trigonometry1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Feb 11, 11:30 am, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >: On Feb 10, 2:48 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >There are valid alternatives to hydrocarbons, not that we need to
> >> >> >entirely give up on our addiction to using hydrocarbons.
>
> >> >> >Thorium as a Secure Nuclear Fuel Alternative / Journal of Energy
> >> >> >Security
>
> >> >> Yeah? Try using THAT as a motor fuel.
>
> >> >With clean, cheap and reliable energy, all sorts of LH2, LOx, H2O2 as
> >> >HTP and quality synfuel hydrocarbons from coal can be easily achieved
> >> >at minimal pollution.
>
> >> What a load of ignorant rubbish.
>
> >> >William Mook can help, whereas you and others of your mainstream sucky
> >> >kind got nothing.
>
> >> <snerk>
>
> >> >I'll provide those 50% efficient fuel cells, and I'll provide a very
> >> >small but extremely powerful duel fuel turbine engine for all types of
> >> >transports that'll generate minimal CO2 and zero NOx, as well as H2O2
> >> >battery hybrids.
>
> >> You're a Usenet loon. You can barely manage masturbation in your
> >> mother's basement.
>
> >On Feb 11, 11:30 am, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >: On Feb 10, 2:48 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >There are valid alternatives to hydrocarbons, not that we need to
> >> >> >entirely give up on our addiction to using hydrocarbons.
>
> >> >> >Thorium as a Secure Nuclear Fuel Alternative / Journal of Energy
> >> >> >Security
>
> >> >> Yeah? Try using THAT as a motor fuel.
>
> >> >With clean, cheap and reliable energy, all sorts of LH2, LOx, H2O2 as
> >> >HTP and quality synfuel hydrocarbons from coal can be easily achieved
> >> >at minimal pollution.
>
> >> What a load of ignorant rubbish.
>
> >> >William Mook can help, whereas you and others of your mainstream sucky
> >> >kind got nothing.
>
> >> <snerk>
>
> >> >I'll provide those 50% efficient fuel cells, and I'll provide a very
> >> >small but extremely powerful duel fuel turbine engine for all types of
> >> >transports that'll generate minimal CO2 and zero NOx, as well as H2O2
> >> >battery hybrids.
>
> >> You're a Usenet loon. You can barely manage masturbation in your
> >> mother's basement.
>
> >Loons live in the attic. Its old trolls like yourself that live in
> >the basement on the charity of an ex-wife ;-).
>
> Gee, the loon self-defense league is apparently springing into action.
> >the basement on the charity of an ex-wife ;-).
>
>
> Sorry to disappoint you, but I have a fairly nice house, a Mercedes
> and a Buick in the garage, and make more than the ex-wife.
>
>
>
> >And it is a fair bet both of you hold distant records of the
> >other score.
>
> And it's a fair bet that you don't, but then you're starting about
>
>
> >And it is a fair bet both of you hold distant records of the
> >other score.
>
> four inches shorter...
So we know your age now at least your mental age.
>
>
>
> >See you on the track if you're not back to a walker yet
> >again..............Trig
>
An you insult on, it suggests thats all your "good" for.
Drop that Pepsi and bag of chips and go out into
the sunlight.
trigonometry1972@gmail.com |
Feb 12, 2012, 2:14:20 AM2/12/12
to
On Feb 11, 11:22 am, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> bob haller <hall...@aol.com> wrote:
> >On Feb 11, 2:54 am, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> bob haller <hall...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> So you keep saying. So, just how many terrorist attacks on nuclear
> >> >> reactors have there been, Bobbert? How much radiation leakage from
> >> >> terrorist attacks has occurred?
>
> >> >> Take your time and think about it....
>
> >> >terrorists have worked in US plants.
>
> >> >all it will take is ONE successful attack to end the industry as we
> >> >know it
>
> >> So, judging from your evasion and failure to answer the question, it
> >> would seem your answer is, "There have been zero terrorist attacks on
> >> nuclear reactors and no radiation leakage from terrorist attacks have
> >> ever occurred, Fred. I guess I was just engaging in my usual penchant
> >> for hyperbolic lying when I said that they are the top terrorist
> >> target".
>
> bob haller <hall...@aol.com> wrote:
> >On Feb 11, 2:54 am, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> bob haller <hall...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> So you keep saying. So, just how many terrorist attacks on nuclear
> >> >> reactors have there been, Bobbert? How much radiation leakage from
> >> >> terrorist attacks has occurred?
>
> >> >> Take your time and think about it....
>
> >> >terrorists have worked in US plants.
>
> >> >all it will take is ONE successful attack to end the industry as we
> >> >know it
>
> >> So, judging from your evasion and failure to answer the question, it
> >> would seem your answer is, "There have been zero terrorist attacks on
> >> nuclear reactors and no radiation leakage from terrorist attacks have
> >> ever occurred, Fred. I guess I was just engaging in my usual penchant
> >> for hyperbolic lying when I said that they are the top terrorist
> >> target".
>
> >nope we have created a absolute best target for terrorists by locating
> >plants near major metropoltian areas.
>
> >the plant near new york city would displace 8 million people if it
> >melted down. the trouble is its impossible to evacuate that many
> >people safely, many would be exposed to high radiation levels......
> >the economic impact to our country would be staggering.
>
> >theres no insurance for a event of that size. the feds would bear the
> >costs.
>
> So, let me ask you again, then. So, just how many terrorist attacks
> >plants near major metropoltian areas.
>
> >the plant near new york city would displace 8 million people if it
> >melted down. the trouble is its impossible to evacuate that many
> >people safely, many would be exposed to high radiation levels......
> >the economic impact to our country would be staggering.
>
> >theres no insurance for a event of that size. the feds would bear the
> >costs.
>
> on nuclear reactors have there been, Bobbert? How much radiation
> leakage from terrorist attacks has occurred? Try actually providing
> an answer this time, if you don't like what your evasions indicate.
>
>
>
> >and let me add terrorists would never fly a commerciall airliner into
> >a skyscraper, clearly thats impossible
>
> Thanks for once again demonstrating just what an ignorant twat you
>
>
> >and let me add terrorists would never fly a commerciall airliner into
> >a skyscraper, clearly thats impossible
>
> are. This is certainly of a piece with your 'sky is falling' rants
> about nuclear reactors.
>
> --
> "Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
> truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
> -- Thomas Jefferson
It takes just one. Anyway after "someone" bombs the Iranian production
reactors
that nation may have some ideas on the matter.
bob haller
Feb 12, 2012, 6:51:50 AM2/12/12
to
On Feb 11, 10:05 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> bob haller <hall...@aol.com> wrote:
> bob haller <hall...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> Even the high one only reads around 70 degrees.
>
and the temperature continues to increase overnite.
russia and japan have something bad in common,
each now have a permanent no humans live here zones. for fear of
cancer and death.
wonder when the US will join the club? either by accident or
intentionally by terrorism?
Jonathan
Feb 12, 2012, 7:29:46 AM2/12/12
to
news:9k8cj75fgmllup0tc...@4ax.com...
> flaming loon.
>
> Now, think about this. If the high capital costs of nuclear plants
> are preventing their construction, just what do you think the chances
> for space solar power are, given that it costs an order of magnitude
> more than nuclear?
>
If SSP had a govt incentive like the one above, I'd say the
chances would improve quite a bit. The goals that NASA
keeps pushing, the Moon and Mars and asteroids and all that
only inspires more budget cuts.
If NASA were a private corporation, this period of the rapid
decline in current and future 'products' would signal an
impending bankruptcy and a total reorganization.
You folks can continue to re-badge the same old vehicles
ya know, the Speilberg-like fantasies of deep-space adventures
and fending off Armageddon and finding ET.
But you're just turning and '58 Edsel into a '79 Pacer.
A goal that has a far greater potential to help out things down
here on Earth is sorely needed by NASA, and by the future.
> --
> "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
> territory."
> --G. Behn
> "Jonathan" <Calli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Fred J. McCall" <fjmc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:he2aj7hvsqgn9ecln...@4ax.com...
>>> Gee, they're building two new reactors in Georgia (the first in three
>>> decades in the US).
>>>
>>> So much for Bobbert's "Fukishima will kill nuclear power" sky is
>>> falling rant...
>>
>>
>>Only 2? Even though....
>>
>>
>>"The Energy Policy Act of 2005 provides loan guarantees of up
>>to 80% of a project's cost and a production tax credit of 1.8 cents
>>per kilowatt hour for new nuclear capacity beginning operation
>>by 2020. The tax credit is specified for the first 8 years of
>>operation and is limited to $125 million per gigawatt per year."
>>
>>"This act has spurred applications for new plants to the Nuclear
>>Regulatory Commission. However, their high capital cost is still
>>an impediment to the deployment of these plants.
>>Some examples include:...."
>>http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/energy-overview/nuclear-2/
>>
>>
>>I'd say it's as close to dead as possible, without
>>actually being dead.
>>
>
> Well, of course you'd say that, Jonathan. That's because you're a
>
>>
>>"Fred J. McCall" <fjmc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:he2aj7hvsqgn9ecln...@4ax.com...
>>> Gee, they're building two new reactors in Georgia (the first in three
>>> decades in the US).
>>>
>>> So much for Bobbert's "Fukishima will kill nuclear power" sky is
>>> falling rant...
>>
>>
>>Only 2? Even though....
>>
>>
>>"The Energy Policy Act of 2005 provides loan guarantees of up
>>to 80% of a project's cost and a production tax credit of 1.8 cents
>>per kilowatt hour for new nuclear capacity beginning operation
>>by 2020. The tax credit is specified for the first 8 years of
>>operation and is limited to $125 million per gigawatt per year."
>>
>>"This act has spurred applications for new plants to the Nuclear
>>Regulatory Commission. However, their high capital cost is still
>>an impediment to the deployment of these plants.
>>Some examples include:...."
>>http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/energy-overview/nuclear-2/
>>
>>
>>I'd say it's as close to dead as possible, without
>>actually being dead.
>>
>
> flaming loon.
>
> Now, think about this. If the high capital costs of nuclear plants
> are preventing their construction, just what do you think the chances
> for space solar power are, given that it costs an order of magnitude
> more than nuclear?
>
If SSP had a govt incentive like the one above, I'd say the
chances would improve quite a bit. The goals that NASA
keeps pushing, the Moon and Mars and asteroids and all that
only inspires more budget cuts.
If NASA were a private corporation, this period of the rapid
decline in current and future 'products' would signal an
impending bankruptcy and a total reorganization.
You folks can continue to re-badge the same old vehicles
ya know, the Speilberg-like fantasies of deep-space adventures
and fending off Armageddon and finding ET.
But you're just turning and '58 Edsel into a '79 Pacer.
A goal that has a far greater potential to help out things down
here on Earth is sorely needed by NASA, and by the future.
> --
> "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
> territory."
> --G. Behn
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
bob haller
Feb 12, 2012, 11:03:23 AM2/12/12
to
On Feb 12, 9:27 am, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> bob haller <hall...@aol.com> wrote:
> >On Feb 11, 10:05 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> bob haller <hall...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> >http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/society.html
>
> >> >fukashima reactor is heating up again. apparently cold shutdown hasnt
> >> >been reached
>
> >> "However, 2 other thermometers in the same reactor read 35 degrees."
>
> >> Even the high one only reads around 70 degrees.
>
> >and the temperature continues to increase overnite.
>
> Cite?
> bob haller <hall...@aol.com> wrote:
> >On Feb 11, 10:05 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> bob haller <hall...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> >http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/society.html
>
> >> >fukashima reactor is heating up again. apparently cold shutdown hasnt
> >> >been reached
>
> >> "However, 2 other thermometers in the same reactor read 35 degrees."
>
> >> Even the high one only reads around 70 degrees.
>
> >and the temperature continues to increase overnite.
>
>
>
>
> >russia and japan have something bad in common,
>
> >each now have a permanent no humans live here zones. for fear of
> >cancer and death.
>
> Well, at least you've got off the 'rendered dead' idiocy. There are
>
>
> >russia and japan have something bad in common,
>
> >each now have a permanent no humans live here zones. for fear of
> >cancer and death.
>
> all sorts of 'permanent no humans live here zones'. All nations have
> them.
>
>
>
> >wonder when the US will join the club? either by accident or
> >intentionally by terrorism?
>
> Wonder when the Bobbert will joining the (human) club by actually
>
>
> >wonder when the US will join the club? either by accident or
> >intentionally by terrorism?
>
> learning to do a bit of critical thinking occasionally?
>
> --
> "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
> territory."
> --G. Behn
so where else are the 50 mile zones of exclusion where its too
> --
> "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
> territory."
> --G. Behn
dangerous for humans to live? cite please
Message has been deleted
bob haller
Feb 12, 2012, 12:11:10 PM2/12/12
to
Temperature at no. 2 reactor rises to 80 degrees
Tokyo Electric Power Company says the reading of one of the
thermometers in the number 2 reactor at its Fukushima Daiichi nuclear
plant surpassed 80 degrees Celsius shortly after 2 PM on Sunday.
TEPCO plans to further investigate the cause, as the thermometer may
be malfunctioning.
The reading of one of the thermometers at the bottom of the reactor
began rising in late January.
It fell temporarily after more water was injected into the reactor,
but started to rise again on Saturday.
The utility increased the amount of cooling water by one ton per hour
to 14.6 tons, but the reading continued to rise and reached 82 degrees
around 2:20 PM.
The government and TEPCO declared in December that all the reactors
were in a state of cold shutdown, with temperatures below 100 degrees.
They set new guidelines to keep reactor temperatures at a maximum of
80 degrees, given the thermometers' margin of error of up to 20
degrees.
This is the first time the temperature reading has exceeded 80 degrees
Celsius since the declaration was made.
TEPCO reported the situation to the Nuclear and Industrial Safety
Agency, and plans to increase the volume of cooling water by 3 tons
per hour to 18 tons.
The utility says radioactive xenon in the gas samples collected near
the reactor is below the detection limit.
It says the thermometer that shows a high temperature is likely to be
malfunctioning, as 2 others in the same reactor have readings of 35
degrees Celsius or lower.
TEPCO says the state of cold shutdown has been maintained, but the
condition inside the reactor remains unknown.
Sunday, February 12, 2012 23:24 +0900 (JST)
Top Stories
Tokyo Electric Power Company says the reading of one of the
thermometers in the number 2 reactor at its Fukushima Daiichi nuclear
plant surpassed 80 degrees Celsius shortly after 2 PM on Sunday.
TEPCO plans to further investigate the cause, as the thermometer may
be malfunctioning.
The reading of one of the thermometers at the bottom of the reactor
began rising in late January.
It fell temporarily after more water was injected into the reactor,
but started to rise again on Saturday.
The utility increased the amount of cooling water by one ton per hour
to 14.6 tons, but the reading continued to rise and reached 82 degrees
around 2:20 PM.
The government and TEPCO declared in December that all the reactors
were in a state of cold shutdown, with temperatures below 100 degrees.
They set new guidelines to keep reactor temperatures at a maximum of
80 degrees, given the thermometers' margin of error of up to 20
degrees.
This is the first time the temperature reading has exceeded 80 degrees
Celsius since the declaration was made.
TEPCO reported the situation to the Nuclear and Industrial Safety
Agency, and plans to increase the volume of cooling water by 3 tons
per hour to 18 tons.
The utility says radioactive xenon in the gas samples collected near
the reactor is below the detection limit.
It says the thermometer that shows a high temperature is likely to be
malfunctioning, as 2 others in the same reactor have readings of 35
degrees Celsius or lower.
TEPCO says the state of cold shutdown has been maintained, but the
condition inside the reactor remains unknown.
Sunday, February 12, 2012 23:24 +0900 (JST)
Top Stories
bob haller
Feb 12, 2012, 1:21:05 PM2/12/12
to
trigonometry1972@gmail.com |
Feb 12, 2012, 2:36:11 PM2/12/12
to
>
>
>
> >> >See you on the track if you're not back to a walker yet
> >> >again..............Trig
>
> >> You lot will gibber on, won't you?
>
> >An you insult on, it suggests thats all your "good" for.
> >Drop that Pepsi and bag of chips and go out into
> >the sunlight.
>
> Hint for you: When you find yourself deep in a hole, STOP DIGGING.
>
>
> >> >See you on the track if you're not back to a walker yet
> >> >again..............Trig
>
> >> You lot will gibber on, won't you?
>
> >An you insult on, it suggests thats all your "good" for.
> >Drop that Pepsi and bag of chips and go out into
> >the sunlight.
>
>
> --
> "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
> territory."
> --G. Behn
What hole? Ah I see, you are a waterless well.
> --
> "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
> territory."
> --G. Behn
Go ahead have the last word.....................Trig
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
bob haller
Feb 12, 2012, 10:23:27 PM2/12/12
to
> >What hole? Ah I see, you are a waterless well.
> >Go ahead have the last word.....................Trig
>
> If you don't want people to think you're an ignorant adolescent
> >Go ahead have the last word.....................Trig
>
> dumbass, you need to stop acting like one.
>
> --
> "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
> territory."
> --G. Behn- Hide quoted text -
> --
> "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
> territory."
>
> - Show quoted text -
Latest reports Tepco really doesnt know whats happening. and the
> - Show quoted text -
meltdown may have required evacuating parts of tokyo.
bob haller
Feb 12, 2012, 10:35:55 PM2/12/12
to
Nuclear accident scenario kept under wraps
A document submitted to the government 2 weeks after the Fukushima
nuclear accident suggested that the Tokyo metropolitan area might have
to be evacuated. But the government failed to acknowledge the
existence of the document until the end of last year.
The Atomic Energy Commission report was compiled at the request of
Naoto Kan, who was Prime Minister at the time.
The commission's chief, Shunsuke Kondo, said the document explains
possible contingencies following the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear
accident as well as preventive measures.
The report said massive amounts of radioactive materials could be
dispersed from the plant if containment vessels were damaged or used
fuel was exposed to the air if water injection failed.
It said under such a scenario, residents would have to be evacuated
from an area within 170 kilometers of the plant and within 250
kilometers on a voluntary basis. This would include the Tokyo
metropolitan area.
The report recommended that different methods should be used to cool
down the reactors.
Kan told NHK last September that his government had made a simulation
based on the worst-case scenario. But the report was not treated as an
official document until it was discovered in the commission's office
at the end of last year.
A Japanese civic group investigating the Fukushima nuclear accident is
looking into the reasons why the document was not made public.
A document submitted to the government 2 weeks after the Fukushima
nuclear accident suggested that the Tokyo metropolitan area might have
to be evacuated. But the government failed to acknowledge the
existence of the document until the end of last year.
The Atomic Energy Commission report was compiled at the request of
Naoto Kan, who was Prime Minister at the time.
The commission's chief, Shunsuke Kondo, said the document explains
possible contingencies following the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear
accident as well as preventive measures.
The report said massive amounts of radioactive materials could be
dispersed from the plant if containment vessels were damaged or used
fuel was exposed to the air if water injection failed.
It said under such a scenario, residents would have to be evacuated
from an area within 170 kilometers of the plant and within 250
kilometers on a voluntary basis. This would include the Tokyo
metropolitan area.
The report recommended that different methods should be used to cool
down the reactors.
Kan told NHK last September that his government had made a simulation
based on the worst-case scenario. But the report was not treated as an
official document until it was discovered in the commission's office
at the end of last year.
A Japanese civic group investigating the Fukushima nuclear accident is
looking into the reasons why the document was not made public.
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Brad Guth
Feb 13, 2012, 1:30:22 AM2/13/12
to
On Feb 11, 11:30 am, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >: On Feb 10, 2:48 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >There are valid alternatives to hydrocarbons, not that we need to
> >> >entirely give up on our addiction to using hydrocarbons.
>
> >> >Thorium as a Secure Nuclear Fuel Alternative / Journal of Energy
> >> >Security
>
> >> Yeah? Try using THAT as a motor fuel.
>
> >With clean, cheap and reliable energy, all sorts of LH2, LOx, H2O2 as
> >HTP and quality synfuel hydrocarbons from coal can be easily achieved
> >at minimal pollution.
>
> What a load of ignorant rubbish.
>
>
>
> >William Mook can help, whereas you and others of your mainstream sucky
> >kind got nothing.
>
> <snerk>
>
>
>
> >I'll provide those 50% efficient fuel cells, and I'll provide a very
> >small but extremely powerful duel fuel turbine engine for all types of
> >transports that'll generate minimal CO2 and zero NOx, as well as H2O2
> >battery hybrids.
>
> You're a Usenet loon. You can barely manage masturbation in your
> mother's basement.
>
> Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >: On Feb 10, 2:48 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >There are valid alternatives to hydrocarbons, not that we need to
> >> >entirely give up on our addiction to using hydrocarbons.
>
> >> >Thorium as a Secure Nuclear Fuel Alternative / Journal of Energy
> >> >Security
>
> >> Yeah? Try using THAT as a motor fuel.
>
> >With clean, cheap and reliable energy, all sorts of LH2, LOx, H2O2 as
> >HTP and quality synfuel hydrocarbons from coal can be easily achieved
> >at minimal pollution.
>
> What a load of ignorant rubbish.
>
>
>
> >William Mook can help, whereas you and others of your mainstream sucky
> >kind got nothing.
>
> <snerk>
>
>
>
> >I'll provide those 50% efficient fuel cells, and I'll provide a very
> >small but extremely powerful duel fuel turbine engine for all types of
> >transports that'll generate minimal CO2 and zero NOx, as well as H2O2
> >battery hybrids.
>
> You're a Usenet loon. You can barely manage masturbation in your
> mother's basement.
>
> --
> "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
> only stupid."
> -- Heinrich Heine
Yes, we all know that your asshole is way bigger and anyone else.
> "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
> only stupid."
> -- Heinrich Heine
bob haller
Feb 13, 2012, 7:42:04 AM2/13/12
to
On Feb 12, 11:55 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 'Worst Case Scenario'. In other words, it's what DID NOT happen.
> Typical Bobberting....
> >Sunday, February 12, 2012 23:24 +0900 (JST)- Hide quoted text -
evacuated........
its issues like these that make nuke power not worth the risks
> 'Worst Case Scenario'. In other words, it's what DID NOT happen.
> Typical Bobberting....
>
> - Show quoted text -
just imagine the disruption to japan if tokyo had to be
> - Show quoted text -
evacuated........
its issues like these that make nuke power not worth the risks
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
trigonometry1972@gmail.com |
Feb 13, 2012, 8:08:22 PM2/13/12
to
him and link to yourself. Fred has gotten to a bore.
I think we've been feeding the beast..........................Trig
Brad Guth
Feb 13, 2012, 9:42:19 PM2/13/12
to
On Feb 13, 5:08 pm, "trigonometry1...@gmail.com |"
Fred is an asshole, and responsible for some of what went terribly
wrong. Fred thinks what happened in Japan was funny and deserving.
wrong. Fred thinks what happened in Japan was funny and deserving.
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Brad Guth
Feb 14, 2012, 1:30:36 AM2/14/12
to
On Feb 13, 7:48 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> is also a massive liar.
>
> But then we all knew that....
asshole.
> Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Fred is an asshole, and responsible for some of what went terribly
> >wrong. Fred thinks what happened in Japan was funny and deserving.
>
> In addition to being an absolute and preposterous loon, The Guthball
>
> >Fred is an asshole, and responsible for some of what went terribly
> >wrong. Fred thinks what happened in Japan was funny and deserving.
>
> is also a massive liar.
>
> But then we all knew that....
>
> --
> "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
> only stupid."
> -- Heinrich Heine
Your usual lack of evidence is noted. You're still a self-evident
> --
> "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
> only stupid."
> -- Heinrich Heine
asshole.
Message has been deleted
bob haller
Feb 14, 2012, 8:33:24 PM2/14/12
to
About 96% of all japanese reactors are currently off line
Only 22% of all japanese are in favor of restarting them
Currently the japanese have approved placing geo thermal equiptement
in their parks to generate electric and they are doing exploratory
drilling off their coast for methane slush.........
Hey japan just might decide to go non nuclear for power generation:)
many of their plants are very old and would likely need replaced even
if they were allowed to restart....
at least westinghouse can make money decominshing nuke plants
worldwide, didnt germany decide to go non nuclear?
cites are avilable at NHKWORLD the japanese news site
Brad Guth
Feb 15, 2012, 1:17:06 AM2/15/12
to
bob haller
Feb 15, 2012, 7:51:58 AM2/15/12
to
> > Hey japan just might decide to go non nuclear for power generation:)
>
> > many of their plants are very old and would likely need replaced even
> > if they were allowed to restart....
>
> > at least westinghouse can make money decominshing nuke plants
> > worldwide, didnt germany decide to go non nuclear?
>
> > cites are avilable at NHKWORLD the japanese news site
>
yes please yes!
trigonometry1972@gmail.com |
Feb 15, 2012, 1:48:08 PM2/15/12
to
Brad Guth
Feb 15, 2012, 3:15:07 PM2/15/12
to
bob haller
Feb 15, 2012, 6:01:49 PM2/15/12
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
he already does he lights up LOON:)
> - Show quoted text -
trigonometry1972@gmail.com |
Feb 15, 2012, 8:55:52 PM2/15/12
to
loonie troll status. He does have his flashes so
a continous glow shouldn't be a big shock.
Message has been deleted
Brad Guth
Feb 16, 2012, 8:51:40 AM2/16/12
to
On Feb 15, 5:55 pm, "trigonometry1...@gmail.com |"
that's not his job. His one and only job is to discredit anyone with
a new or better idea, or any better interpretation of existing science.
<trigonometry1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 15, 3:01 pm, bob haller <hall...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 15, 3:15 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 15, 10:48 am, "trigonometry1...@gmail.com |"
>
> > > <trigonometry1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Feb 15, 4:51 am, bob haller <hall...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Hey japan just might decide to go non nuclear for power generation:)
>
> > > > > > > many of their plants are very old and would likely need replaced even
> > > > > > > if they were allowed to restart....
>
> > > > > > > at least westinghouse can make money decominshing nuke plants
> > > > > > > worldwide, didnt germany decide to go non nuclear?
>
> > > > > > > cites are avilable at NHKWORLD the japanese news site
>
> > > > > >They can also send all of their spent nuclear fuel to Fred McCall.-
>
> > > > > yes please yes!
>
> > > > Naw, take Fred to it and then chain him to it.
>
> > > But then he'd glow in the dark.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > he already does he lights up LOON:)
>
> Fred is an achiever. One that has achieved top
> loonie troll status. He does have his flashes so
> a continous glow shouldn't be a big shock.
Fred never constructively contributes anything on-topic, because
> On Feb 15, 3:01 pm, bob haller <hall...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 15, 3:15 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 15, 10:48 am, "trigonometry1...@gmail.com |"
>
> > > <trigonometry1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Feb 15, 4:51 am, bob haller <hall...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Hey japan just might decide to go non nuclear for power generation:)
>
> > > > > > > many of their plants are very old and would likely need replaced even
> > > > > > > if they were allowed to restart....
>
> > > > > > > at least westinghouse can make money decominshing nuke plants
> > > > > > > worldwide, didnt germany decide to go non nuclear?
>
> > > > > > > cites are avilable at NHKWORLD the japanese news site
>
> > > > > >They can also send all of their spent nuclear fuel to Fred McCall.-
>
> > > > > yes please yes!
>
> > > > Naw, take Fred to it and then chain him to it.
>
> > > But then he'd glow in the dark.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > he already does he lights up LOON:)
>
> Fred is an achiever. One that has achieved top
> loonie troll status. He does have his flashes so
> a continous glow shouldn't be a big shock.
that's not his job. His one and only job is to discredit anyone with
a new or better idea, or any better interpretation of existing science.
trigonometry1972@gmail.com |
Feb 16, 2012, 11:38:23 AM2/16/12
to
the Usenet have never have thought anew or even attempted it.
Fred is a classic example. He has already built his own coffin.
little boxes................................Trig
bob haller
Feb 16, 2012, 6:26:21 PM2/16/12
to
On Feb 16, 11:38 am, "trigonometry1...@gmail.com |"
> little boxes................................Trig- Hide quoted text -
must have stock in nuke power industry.......
>
> - Show quoted text -
fred job is to proclaim nuke power safe, even during a meltdown. he
> - Show quoted text -
must have stock in nuke power industry.......
trigonometry1972@gmail.com |
Feb 16, 2012, 6:37:27 PM2/16/12
to
On Feb 15, 8:21 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Isn't it nice when three out of four loons self-identify like that?
> Little mads all in a row, they are.
> Little mads all in a row, they are.
trigonometry1972@gmail.com |
Feb 16, 2012, 6:39:01 PM2/16/12
to
On Feb 15, 8:21 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "trigonometry1...@gmail.com |" <trigonometry1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "trigonometry1...@gmail.com |" <trigonometry1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Isn't it nice when three out of four loons self-identify like that?
> Little mads all in a row, they are.
>
> --
> "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
> only stupid."
> -- Heinrich Heine
You are the fourth loonie so welcome to the club of 4.
> Little mads all in a row, they are.
>
> --
> "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
> only stupid."
> -- Heinrich Heine
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Brad Guth
Feb 18, 2012, 1:39:36 AM2/18/12
to
screw up.
trigonometry1972@gmail.com |
Feb 18, 2012, 1:58:16 AM2/18/12
to
On Feb 16, 7:48 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "trigonometry1...@gmail.com |" <trigonometry1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> "trigonometry1...@gmail.com |" <trigonometry1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Fred is discredited in my eyes.
>
> Gee, I'm just CRUSHED.
>
>
> <snerk>
>
> --
> "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
> only stupid."
> -- Heinrich Heine
Naw, your ego knows no bounds.
> --
> "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
> only stupid."
> -- Heinrich Heine
You're still discredited in my eyes.
I am just one little man. Maybe you were
a big man in your day but look were you are at now?
Who are talking to now? Peers? Inferiors? Superiors?
Those who will bother to talk back.
You're a thug as I see it. Maybe a-want-a-be thug but
your aim is clear as to what you want to be.
Intent says a lot about a person.
An old man at the edge of the world.....................Trig
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
bob haller
Feb 18, 2012, 11:23:42 AM2/18/12
to
> told over and over again that I'm nowhere near Sandia (and how they
> became his personal bogeyman must be quite a story of lunacy) and
> don't work for GE. Just a little while ago he at least had it figured
> out that I worked in aerospace, but he seems to have lost that bit of
> reality, too.
>
> --
> "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
> only stupid."
> -- Heinrich Heine- Hide quoted text -
> --
> "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
> only stupid."
>
> - Show quoted text -
its incredible you work for aerospace, hopefully its not for a
> - Show quoted text -
commercial airliner manufacturer.
the idea you have anything to do with human transport is scary at best.
Message has been deleted
Brad Guth
Feb 18, 2012, 5:55:23 PM2/18/12
to
do with aerospace or aviation, other than creating false-flag
missions.
Once you consider Fred as one and the same as HVAC, BDK, rabbi Saul
Levy or Art Deco, it'll all make perfect sense.
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?hl=en
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
Message has been deleted
trigonometry1972@gmail.com |
Feb 19, 2012, 1:00:50 AM2/19/12
to
On Feb 18, 6:19 am, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "trigonometry1...@gmail.com |" <trigonometry1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Feb 16, 7:48 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> "trigonometry1...@gmail.com |" <trigonometry1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >Fred is discredited in my eyes.
>
> >> Gee, I'm just CRUSHED.
>
> >> <snerk>
>
> "trigonometry1...@gmail.com |" <trigonometry1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Feb 16, 7:48 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> "trigonometry1...@gmail.com |" <trigonometry1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >Fred is discredited in my eyes.
>
> >> Gee, I'm just CRUSHED.
>
> >> <snerk>
>
> >Naw, your ego knows no bounds.
> >You're still discredited in my eyes.
> >I am just one little man. Maybe you were
> >a big man in your day but look were you are at now?
> >Who are talking to now? Peers? Inferiors? Superiors?
> >Those who will bother to talk back.
>
> I hate to break it to you, but I'm just poking the loons.
> >You're still discredited in my eyes.
> >I am just one little man. Maybe you were
> >a big man in your day but look were you are at now?
> >Who are talking to now? Peers? Inferiors? Superiors?
> >Those who will bother to talk back.
>
>
>
>
> >You're a thug as I see it. Maybe a-want-a-be thug but
> >your aim is clear as to what you want to be.
> >Intent says a lot about a person.
>
> Awww, poor Trig. Are you feeling 'thugged'? On USENET???
>
>
> >You're a thug as I see it. Maybe a-want-a-be thug but
> >your aim is clear as to what you want to be.
> >Intent says a lot about a person.
>
>
> If you don't like being treated like one of the loons, STOP BEING ONE.
>
>
>
> >An old man at the edge of the world.....................Trig
>
> What are you, about 12?
>
>
> >An old man at the edge of the world.....................Trig
>
>
> --
> "Sir, you pride yourself on an ability in which any ignorant barbarian
> is your equal and any jackass immeasurably your superior."
> -- John Randolph
Better age 12 than whatever your age is............................Trig
Brad Guth
Feb 19, 2012, 1:17:40 AM2/19/12
to
On Feb 18, 10:00 pm, "trigonometry1...@gmail.com |"
Fred is FUD-master Semite that pretends being an Atheists. There's
really not much point in reading or replying to whatever Fred has to
say.
http://groups.google.com/groups/search
really not much point in reading or replying to whatever Fred has to
say.
http://groups.google.com/groups/search
Message has been deleted
bob haller
Feb 19, 2012, 6:53:01 PM2/19/12
to
JAPAN NOW HAS JUST 2 OPERATING REACTORS, IN THE ENTIRE NATION :)
The remaing 2 are scheduled to be shut down by april.....
with japans efforts in methane slush and geo thermal the country might
permanetely end nuke power plants.......
germany is doing the same thing......
The remaing 2 are scheduled to be shut down by april.....
with japans efforts in methane slush and geo thermal the country might
permanetely end nuke power plants.......
germany is doing the same thing......
Brad Guth
Feb 19, 2012, 8:20:55 PM2/19/12
to
and Mokenergy hydrogen is perhaps even better because of what those 50+
% efficient fuel cells can deliver, plus their waste heat recovery
isn't exactly worthless.
Message has been deleted
Wayne Throop
Feb 19, 2012, 9:47:39 PM2/19/12
to
:: Geothermal is certainly a good way to go, however thorium is similar,
: Thorium is NOTHING like geothermal.
Indeed. Geothermal is several orders of magnitude less energy-dense
per collector area on world-wide average than solar, and considerably
less energy-dense than hydroelectric. It's not even in the same ballpark
as fission of any kind. Not even on the same continent as the ballpark.
Geothermal is fine if you happen to be living on top of a hot-spot,
but to a close approximation, nobody is. Just divide the geothermal
flux from all sources by the population, and you find out that you can
support several iceland's-worth of people's energy needs. What should
the other 99+% of the world population do?
And no, even something as extensive as drilling to emplace heat exchangers
in the upper mantle doesn't help much, for reasons that are apparent to
anybody who's seen (or read about) lava flows.
None of which means somebody who *does* happen to live on a hot spot
should turn up their nose at the free steam. Because hey, free steam.
But it certainly isn't going to tip the global energy balance.
"When life gives you lemons, keep them.
Because hey, free lemons."
--- tee-shirt slogan
: Thorium is NOTHING like geothermal.
Indeed. Geothermal is several orders of magnitude less energy-dense
per collector area on world-wide average than solar, and considerably
less energy-dense than hydroelectric. It's not even in the same ballpark
as fission of any kind. Not even on the same continent as the ballpark.
Geothermal is fine if you happen to be living on top of a hot-spot,
but to a close approximation, nobody is. Just divide the geothermal
flux from all sources by the population, and you find out that you can
support several iceland's-worth of people's energy needs. What should
the other 99+% of the world population do?
And no, even something as extensive as drilling to emplace heat exchangers
in the upper mantle doesn't help much, for reasons that are apparent to
anybody who's seen (or read about) lava flows.
None of which means somebody who *does* happen to live on a hot spot
should turn up their nose at the free steam. Because hey, free steam.
But it certainly isn't going to tip the global energy balance.
"When life gives you lemons, keep them.
Because hey, free lemons."
--- tee-shirt slogan
Brad Guth
Feb 19, 2012, 11:35:14 PM2/19/12
to
On Feb 19, 6:47 pm, thro...@sheol.org (Wayne Throop) wrote:
> :: Geothermal is certainly a good way to go, however thorium is similar,
>
> : Thorium is NOTHING like geothermal.
Thorium gets hot and with a few extra protons/neutrons it stays hot.
> :: Geothermal is certainly a good way to go, however thorium is similar,
>
> : Thorium is NOTHING like geothermal.
If that's not similar to geothermal, then nothing is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten_salt_reactor
>
> Indeed. Geothermal is several orders of magnitude less energy-dense
> per collector area on world-wide average than solar, and considerably
> less energy-dense than hydroelectric. It's not even in the same ballpark
> as fission of any kind. Not even on the same continent as the ballpark.
>
> Geothermal is fine if you happen to be living on top of a hot-spot,
> but to a close approximation, nobody is. Just divide the geothermal
> flux from all sources by the population, and you find out that you can
> support several iceland's-worth of people's energy needs. What should
> the other 99+% of the world population do?
>
> And no, even something as extensive as drilling to emplace heat exchangers
> in the upper mantle doesn't help much, for reasons that are apparent to
> anybody who's seen (or read about) lava flows.
>
> None of which means somebody who *does* happen to live on a hot spot
> should turn up their nose at the free steam. Because hey, free steam.
> But it certainly isn't going to tip the global energy balance.
>
> "When life gives you lemons, keep them.
> Because hey, free lemons."
> --- tee-shirt slogan
at the turbine and returned to the hole.
However, I tend to favor burning thorium.
William Mook favors burning his cheap hydrogen, and I also agree with
that, using fuel cells at 50+% efficiency.
Wayne Throop
Feb 19, 2012, 11:55:06 PM2/19/12
to
:::: Geothermal is certainly a good way to go, however thorium is similar,
: Brad Guth <brad...@gmail.com>
: Thorium gets hot and with a few extra protons/neutrons it stays hot.
Which it isn't. If you really can't tell the difference between
a something that simply *is* not and something that *gets* hot,
well then, aren't you special.
Indeed, if all it takes to be "similar to (thorium) fission" is to have
something that's not, then there's very, very little that *isn't* "like
(thorium) fission", including everything from wind to coal.
: Drill/TBM much deeper.
Which, of course, doesn't work. Trying to drag more heat out than comes
of itself simply doesn't work, no matter how deep you drill. For reasons
that anybody who knows much about molten rock can tell you. Hint: if you
take heat out of molten rock, it becomes solid rock, and a reasonably
good insulator once there's no convection.
To sum up. Geothermal is neither a good way to go in terms of making
a significant contribution to the global energy budget, nor is it
like (thorium) fission in any relevant, nontrivial way.
: Brad Guth <brad...@gmail.com>
: Thorium gets hot and with a few extra protons/neutrons it stays hot.
: If that's not similar to geothermal, then nothing is.
Then nothing is. If your implication were correct.
Which it isn't. If you really can't tell the difference between
a something that simply *is* not and something that *gets* hot,
well then, aren't you special.
Indeed, if all it takes to be "similar to (thorium) fission" is to have
something that's not, then there's very, very little that *isn't* "like
(thorium) fission", including everything from wind to coal.
: Drill/TBM much deeper.
Which, of course, doesn't work. Trying to drag more heat out than comes
of itself simply doesn't work, no matter how deep you drill. For reasons
that anybody who knows much about molten rock can tell you. Hint: if you
take heat out of molten rock, it becomes solid rock, and a reasonably
good insulator once there's no convection.
To sum up. Geothermal is neither a good way to go in terms of making
a significant contribution to the global energy budget, nor is it
like (thorium) fission in any relevant, nontrivial way.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages