never ending disasters in the filthy fossil fuel industry, no. 42....66 trapped...42 dead...
abelard
what was that crap about 'clean coal'?
what was the crap about the dangers of nuclear power? in fact
the safest mass power known....
oh don't worry...it's nothing to do with us....we're trying to clean
up the planet...
this is just the china to where we are exporting out manufacturing
to save the planet!
the filth will stay in china....
http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/11/21/china-mine-explosion.html
"At least 42 miners are dead and dozens still trapped underground
after a coal mine explosion in northern China early Saturday.
Rescuers have been trying to reach 66 people who are believed to be
half a kilometre inside the state-owned Xinxing mine, near Hegang City
in China's Heilongjiang province.
State-run media reports that at the time of the explosion an
evacuation was underway after a warning about gas levels in the shaft.
The blast was so powerful that it caused a nearby building to collapse
and could be heard by people in Hegang, 10 kilometres away."
regards
--
web site at www.abelard.org - news comment service, logic, economics
energy, education, politics, etc over 1 million document calls in year past
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
all that is necessary for [] walk quietly and carry
the triumph of evil is that [] a big stick.
good people do nothing [] trust actions not words
only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The gods have made us mad
> what was that crap about 'clean coal'?
> what was the crap about the dangers of nuclear power? in fact
> the safest mass power known....
Wouldn't it be wonderful if the entire world could be powered solely by
hot air? - in the way that Ch�teau Abelard is....
Arky Bob
> the filth will stay in china....
This is bad?
abelard
but is isn't true...the filthy air circulates around the planet
Arky Bob
> but is isn't true...the filthy air circulates around the planet
Solution - stop shopping at WalMart (and Sams and Costco and Target
and Best Buy and K-Mart) and all the smoke belching factories in China
will close down.
abelard
interesting isn't it...
yet the idiots keep claiming china will supercede the usa....
or as that other socialist, khrushchev said...they will bury the
west
Farmer Giles
"abelard" <abel...@abelard.org> wrote in message
news:nefgg5tfs65co46gf...@4ax.com...
>
> what was that crap about 'clean coal'?
> what was the crap about the dangers of nuclear power? in fact
> the safest mass power known....
Thank you, but we don't need any more evidence that you are stark staring
bonkers.
abelard
wrote:
i've never seen the slightest evidence that you have the
slightest interest in evidence
Farmer Giles
> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 19:55:25 -0000, "Farmer Giles" <Gi...@nospam.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"abelard" <abel...@abelard.org> wrote in message
>>news:nefgg5tfs65co46gf...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>> what was that crap about 'clean coal'?
>>> what was the crap about the dangers of nuclear power? in fact
>>> the safest mass power known....
>>
>>Thank you, but we don't need any more evidence that you are stark staring
>>bonkers.
>
> i've never seen the slightest evidence that you have the
> slightest interest in evidence
That's because you're stark staring bonkers - and illiterate!
FrereTuck
> what was that crap about 'clean coal'? what was the crap about the
> dangers of nuclear power? in fact
> the safest mass power known....
>
[blah-blah-blah sounding like a bernays student cut]
> The blast was so powerful that it caused a nearby building to collapse
> and could be heard by people in Hegang, 10 kilometres away."
>
>
> regards
still, surely?, a minor incident compared to Chernobyl no? where sheep
were slaughtered due to contamination > 1000 miles away? no?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/apr/13/ruralaffairs.jamesmeikle
Sheep farms under curbs see no end to Chernobyl fallout
· More than 400 still face safety measures
· Tests on sheep show high caesium levels persist
* James Meikle
* The Guardian, Thursday 13 April 2006
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/1071289.stm
Friday, 15 December, 2000, 08:37 GMT
Chernobyl still hitting hill farms
abelard
>On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 20:28:23 +0100, abelard wrote:
>
>> what was that crap about 'clean coal'? what was the crap about the
>> dangers of nuclear power? in fact
>> the safest mass power known....
>>
>
>[blah-blah-blah sounding like a bernays student cut]
>
>> The blast was so powerful that it caused a nearby building to collapse
>> and could be heard by people in Hegang, 10 kilometres away."
>still, surely?, a minor incident compared to Chernobyl no?
very few killed...the only half serious nuclear power
accident...socialist technology without proper containment
socialist supervision....
> where sheep
>were slaughtered due to contamination > 1000 miles away? no?
probably unnecessary panic...
>http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/apr/13/ruralaffairs.jamesmeikle
>
>Sheep farms under curbs see no end to Chernobyl fallout
>
>� More than 400 still face safety measures
>� Tests on sheep show high caesium levels persist
> * James Meikle
> * The Guardian, Thursday 13 April 2006
groaniad
strange you missed out this bit
"The tests, done on animals within 24 hours of their leaving the
highest slopes, show that many farms still suffer serious problems.
Although the sheep excrete the caesium rapidly when they are moved to
lower pastures, the element has a half-life of 30 years."
and then there was aberfan and silicosis...
and you missed this carefully tucked in a the end
"Officially, fewer than 50 people have so far perished as a result of
Chernobyl, according to a study last year by the IAEA, the UN and the
WHO."
144 died at aberfan....and that was just one incident among many
>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/1071289.stm
>
>Friday, 15 December, 2000, 08:37 GMT
>Chernobyl still hitting hill farms
groaniad and bbc....
barrel...you're barrel scraping....
FrereTuck
I mean nuclear power is so fucking dangerous they still have not (how
many years?) been able to fix the purported leak at sellafield that lost
x tons of high grade shit into 'secondary' and only other containment (if
it wasn't stolen by private operators)
thats the fucking lake district fucked...
I would want the death of all politicians and corporate contractors if
that happened.
FrereTuck
> Officially
yeah...
FrereTuck
well, those responsible.
as I think it only fair blair and cabal and bush and cabal are tried in
Iraq and Afghanistan (if one dont botch the hanging then the other gets
an attempt)
McKevvy
...as would most of the supermarkets in the UK
McKevvy
Farmer Giles
"FrereTuck" <no...@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2009.11...@invalid.com...
Don't confuse him with facts!
abelard
you're blathering...i'll just bet you can't even
define 'high grade shit'
even your 'leak' is only 'purported' and is only one leak
>thats the fucking lake district fucked...
yeah, that's why it has visitors by the million...
>I would want the death of all politicians and corporate contractors if
>that happened.
they're the ones fooling you into believing you
need their 'protection' and have to pay them
billions for trivia
go get yourself a tin foil beanie
McKevvy
That's why it was renamed from Windscale - new name = new buildings in
the politicians minds. Unfortunately most of Joe Public believed that
too.
McKevvy
abelard
and the renaming was political
Bert Hyman
<abel...@abelard.org> wrote:
> what was that crap about 'clean coal'?
> what was the crap about the dangers of nuclear power? in fact
> the safest mass power known....
I'm not entirely sure I understand your argument.
Clean coal is not about the safety of the extraction process, but I'm
sure you really know that. The Chinese government's careless attitude
toward the safety of its citizens is pretty well known too.
Uranium mining's not without its own set of problems too.
I'm sure that the nuclear power plants in your part of the world are
operated safely, but some people in some parts of the world aren't as
conscientious as your folks have been.
If you demand absolute safety in the production and delivery of all the
products and services in your life, you'll be in for hard and short
existence.
How many people die on the roads and rails every year transporting the
produce that goes into your dinner salad?
It's a dangerous world.
--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN be...@iphouse.com
abelard
>In news:nefgg5tfs65co46gf...@4ax.com abelard
><abel...@abelard.org> wrote:
>
>> what was that crap about 'clean coal'?
>> what was the crap about the dangers of nuclear power? in fact
>> the safest mass power known....
>
>I'm not entirely sure I understand your argument.
>
>Clean coal is not about the safety of the extraction process, but I'm
>sure you really know that. The Chinese government's careless attitude
>toward the safety of its citizens is pretty well known too.
clean coal has not been demonstrated as viable anywhere...
what has been suggested thus far indicates that if it ever
arrives it may cost 4-8 times the prices...
it is just another piece of misdirection by the filthy fossil fuel
industry and their client politicians
>Uranium mining's not without its own set of problems too.
true...but they are not on the same scale
>I'm sure that the nuclear power plants in your part of the world are
>operated safely, but some people in some parts of the world aren't as
>conscientious as your folks have been.
certainly...but it remains despite that the safety standards
and records of the nuclear industry are vastly superior
to the filthy fossil fuel industry...
>If you demand absolute safety in the production and delivery of all the
>products and services in your life, you'll be in for hard and short
>existence.
of course
>How many people die on the roads and rails every year transporting the
>produce that goes into your dinner salad?
>
>It's a dangerous world.
indeed...but it is made more and unnecessarily dangerous by filthy
fossil fuels
FrereTuck
well, I'd like to see him volunteer to do a months camping on the site
without any iodine or other protection.....
abelard
that's because you're a fool...
meanwhile iodine is not relevant to cesium
approximately
iodine(131) has a short half life of 8 days
cesium is more like 30 years...
iodine is more than a 1400 times more active than cesium
thus for one day with iodine, the equivalent with cesium
would be 4 years
your problems stem from fear of what you don't understand
FrereTuck
so you're not volunteering then?
you wouldn't get permission anyway... and those 16 ft ants would probably
get you ;)
abelard
i've camped up there...
i've even swum in the lake used by a nuclear power station...
and i don't even glow in the dark...allegedly
your problems stem from fear of what you don't understand
--
FrereTuck
if there's 100 people get 40 years knocked off their lives, does that
count as 50 dead.... ?
FrereTuck
a lie told often enough... ?
you've camped-up 'where' ? ;)
abelard
more or less....
then start comparing similar figures for the filthy fossil industry
the term you want is lle...."loss of life expectancy"
here are some examples
living near a nuclear plant...... .4 days
working as a coal miner 1100 days
being male rather than female 2800 days
motor vehicle accidents 180 days
married to a smoker 50 days
cigarettes...male....2300 days
radon in homes 35 days
firearms 11 days
eating peanut butte.....1 tbspn a day 1.1 days
30lbs overweight...900 days...
dam failures 1 day
homicide 90 days
these are american figures circa 1980....
i've no doubt a chinese coal minor does much worse
keep that tin foil hat on tight
abelard
n. wales....among other places
your problems stem from fear of what you don't understand
--
FrereTuck
ach.. yakhont... hardly Chernobyl 'ground-zero' is it... ?
abelard
it is what certain tin foil hats were raving about....disably
assisted by the socialist bbc and the socialist groaniad
meanwhile i read an interesting tour through the 'terrible'
chernobyl area on a motorbike by a young lady....
some places in the area do have desultory keep out
notices....it's done wonders for the local ecology...
your problems stem from fear of what you don't understand
--
FrereTuck
really? where? some publication I am too much of a philistine to
subscribe to perhaps?
> some places in the area do have desultory keep out
> notices....it's done wonders for the local ecology...
>
> your problems stem from fear of what you don't understand
my problem, indeed the worlds problems stem from the fact there's a
multitude of shites like you...
abelard
it's on the web someplace
>> some places in the area do have desultory keep out
>> notices....it's done wonders for the local ecology...
>>
>> your problems stem from fear of what you don't understand
>
>my problem, indeed the worlds problems stem from the fact there's a
>multitude of shites like you...
what? you'd prefer to continue to live in your
own make believe world where you can fly if only
you wish hard enough
FrereTuck
> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 00:44:00 GMT, FrereTuck <no...@invalid.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 01:21:15 +0100, abelard wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 00:14:37 GMT, FrereTuck <no...@invalid.com> wrote:
>
>>>>ach.. yakhont... hardly Chernobyl 'ground-zero' is it... ?
>>>
>>> it is what certain tin foil hats were raving about....disably
>>> assisted by the socialist bbc and the socialist groaniad
>>>
>>> meanwhile i read an interesting tour through the 'terrible'
>>> chernobyl area on a motorbike by a young lady....
>>>
>>>
>>really? where? some publication I am too much of a philistine to
>>subscribe to perhaps?
>
> it's on the web someplace
>
I'd expect you to confuse pitching tent at ground zero for one month with
some broad passing through at 70mph closest to ground zero 30 miles.
abelard
people have been working on the chernobyl site forever...
probably still are
the facility was even generating long after the meltdown
your problems stem from fear of what you don't understand
--
FrereTuck
> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 01:02:39 GMT, FrereTuck <no...@invalid.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 01:47:42 +0100, abelard wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 00:44:00 GMT, FrereTuck <no...@invalid.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 01:21:15 +0100, abelard wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 00:14:37 GMT, FrereTuck <no...@invalid.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>ach.. yakhont... hardly Chernobyl 'ground-zero' is it... ?
>>>>>
>>>>> it is what certain tin foil hats were raving about....disably
>>>>> assisted by the socialist bbc and the socialist groaniad
>>>>>
>>>>> meanwhile i read an interesting tour through the 'terrible'
>>>>> chernobyl area on a motorbike by a young lady....
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>really? where? some publication I am too much of a philistine to
>>>>subscribe to perhaps?
>>>
>>> it's on the web someplace
>>>
>>>
>>I'd expect you to confuse pitching tent at ground zero for one month
>>with some broad passing through at 70mph closest to ground zero 30
>>miles.
>
> people have been working on the chernobyl site forever...
> probably still are
> the facility was even generating long after the meltdown
>
> your problems stem from fear of what you don't understand
ok goebbels has no balls, (funny isnt that what abelard was famous
for...?), lets have some sources to confirm your claim.
abelard
i do quite enough for you....
about time you did some work for yourself
then maybe you'd have less problems stemming from your
fear of what you don't understand
--
FrereTuck
I understand enough to know the 500m radius around the sarcophagus, (or
the forest hotspot 1.5km away) even now, 23 years later, is not a place
anyone should be pitching their tent, except you perhaps... that would be
OK, and I am sure you fully understand it enough to offer to prove how
safe it is by staying in the 500m radius for one month with no time
outside the 500m radius, and no radiation protection or medication, as
its as safe as you claim.
Chernobyl, 22 Years Later
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/31/eveningnews/main3984592.shtml
CBS News was on the site less than 10 minutes when one member of the
group went over his exposure limit.
FrereTuck
> you're blathering...i'll just bet you can't even
> define 'high grade shit'
>
> even your 'leak' is only 'purported' and is only one leak
as you seem unaware of the facts, not unusual by any means....
first, 30kg of weapons grade plutonium reported missing, explained away
by the companies goebbels-dept. as 'auditing error'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4272691.stm
then they discover undetected leak of 20 tonnes of uranium and 160kg
plutonium dissolved in nitric acid which still lies only protected by
secondary containment. now let me think... what is it acid does?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cumbria/4589321.stm
abelard
>On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 22:28:06 +0100, abelard wrote:
>
>> you're blathering...i'll just bet you can't even
>> define 'high grade shit'
>>
>> even your 'leak' is only 'purported' and is only one leak
>
>as you seem unaware of the facts, not unusual by any means....
>
>first, 30kg of weapons grade plutonium reported missing, explained away
>by the companies goebbels-dept. as 'auditing error'
sigh...
windscale is not primarily nuclear power...it is nuclear
bombs....
in the early days...and with governments involved...only
a dope would expect high standards of efficiency
in the usa there were tales of people throwing plutonium around
and to each other for fun...arsing about...
in russia there are hundreds of miles of contamination because
of the usual socialist 'couldn't care less'
dumping their waste as easily as the filthy fossil fuel industry
still dumps it to this day...
bomb manufacture require *much* more concentrated material
>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4272691.stm
>
>then they discover undetected leak of 20 tonnes of uranium and 160kg
>plutonium dissolved in nitric acid which still lies only protected by
>secondary containment. now let me think... what is it acid does?
and as usual you accidentally left out
"UKAEA said there was no reason to think there was any "real loss" of
plutonium.
In a statement it said: "The material unaccounted for (MUF) figures
for 2003/04 were all within international standards of expected
measurement accuracies for closing a nuclear material balance at the
type of facility concerned." "
and much etc.
>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cumbria/4589321.stm
a level 3...and the stuff never left the plant...
get you tin foil hat fixed....it's obviously leaking
and once again you rely upon the socialist broadcasting 'service'...
that's not very bright you know...
or perhaps you don't know
as usual
your problems stem from fear of what you don't understand
abelard
as usual you don't understand the real world
the safety limits in the nuclear industry are far higher that, even
than the neuroses of the socialist 'new' labour nanny state....
as i've already told you....chernobyl was still producing electricity
many years after the meltdown....and people have been working
on the site ever since....
nagasaki and hiroshima have returned to functioning cities long
past....
i wouldn't trust you to do a coast or fell walk of without falling
off a cliff, let alone trust you on the roads...
that's why the whole country is plastered with warning signs
especially for the convenience of you and your peers...
but for some magical reason you seem still to be among the
unded posting to usenet
as ever your problems stem from fear of what you don't understand