Can the Japan Nuclear crisis happen in North America?

[dutchdivco]

I may be mistaken

I haven't looked it up, but I thought eugenics involves someone deciding WHO should be allowed to breed.I don't believe I was saying that.However, it should be noted that 'civilised' man does seem to do things which work at direct cross purposes to 'natural selection'.
And yes, a big part of the problem is this 'civilised' lifestyle of congregating in large cities.Of depending on long frail supply lines to provide us, for a price, with the necessities of life.
On an individual basis, by breaking our dependence on these supply lines, and developing self sustainment methods of supplying ourselves with the necessities, we address this in our own lives.
In addition, we are 'voting with our feet', and our 'pocketbook'; we are refusing to feed the machine.Unfortunately, I don't see enough people taking this coarse of action to make a difference.
Its like the Titannic is headed for an iceberg.Talking to the Captain is useless, he's screaming "Full speed ahead". Some passengers and crew are out on deck, arguing about the proper arrangement of the deck chairs. (Political parties). Other wealthy passengers are standing off to the side, making bets on the outcome of these arguments (Wall street). A few passengers are at the back of the boat, quietly lowering a lifeboat, knowing that the ship is going to hit an Iceberg, and they are doing the only thing they can; removing themselves from the equation.THATS what I'm talking about.Its not a great solution, maybe not even a good solution.I simply see it as the only viable solution for me.I don't believe I am going to have any success pursuading the Captain to change coarse, and getting drawn into the arguments on the deck chairs is fruitless, as is participating in the gambling.What good is the $ going to be, when the ship goes down?
Anyway, if I have seem to have drawn this topic off coarse, the original premise is absurd.The answer is "YES, Of Coarse it could and sooner or later will happen here." I've then gone on to talk a little about what I am doing about it, in my life.Trying to work towards a life where I don't support the beast, with my $ or energy or consumption.Jim

[o541o]

Hi all. Been lurking this forum for awhile but this is my first post.

There are "inactive" fault lines all over the place. A well known one is the New Madrid fault line in the U.S. which basically follows the Mississippi River. It caused a massive quake in the early 1800's that was strong enough to cause things to fall off of shelves and break windows in NY some 1600(?) miles away. The Mississippi River actually ran backwards for a few days.

Scientists say it's not likely to do any shifting soon if ever but if they're wrong? What if the volcano called Yellowstone starts to rumble? Might that change something in this "extinct" fault line? New Madrid pretty much splits the US north/south. Could a massive quake on the west coast do something to the plate(s) west of the New Madrid fault line? How could anyone possibly predict these unknowns with any degree of accuracy?

This fault line also just happens to run perilously close to the largest concentration of reactors in the US in the state of Illinois and a couple of them are practically right next to the river/fault line. If they (or the on-site waste) were to leak into the river it could poison everything clear down into the Gulf of Mexico and beyond. Bottom line is that we know this fault has shifted at least twice in the last 2000 years. It *could* happen again.

Well I've rambled enough. Please excuse me if I don't feel safe!

[boguslaw]

We should stop ALL nuclear plants in the world and pray.


I may sound as madman but consider the possibility that our solar plane is flipping in grand cycle taking 26000 years while passing the galactic eclipse.
It's very probable if that theory is truth , California and Japan will sink and many coasts also like predicted , when Earth change rotation direction and poles shift.

Ok, I won't say it again, it's too scary.

[Gdez]

Lowering lifeboat

Sorry to sound pesimistic, because I always thought the survivalist guys were a little nutty. But at this point I'm starting to wonder if I shouldn't start digging. I am also trying to vote with my wallet and grow and raise my own food, but too many people seem too comfy, and If there is change happening, I sure can't see it. It's unbeleivable that conservation alone isn't preached more. I have made a significant change in my lifestyle and you know, I not only feel better physically but mentally also, and I'm not reading by candlelite. My carbon footprint has went down tremedously with just one simple thing...Information. It's about getting the word out too. Lead by example and let other people know what you are doing and encourage them to do the same. I would love to move out to the mountains of WV and hide, but as seen with this disaster in Japan, maybe you can only run so far. If we don't start trying to change now, with our addiction to energy, it seems that it willl get the best of us.

[Aaron]

radioactive milk in spokane

Radiation in milk here in my town:
'Minuscule Amount' Of Radiation Found In Spokane Milk - News Story - KXLY Spokane

Miniscule safe amounts of course!

[dutchdivco]

Another part of the poorly executed disinformation

Campaign, is a lot more than semantics.There wasn't radiation in the milk, there was radioactive fallout.When they do all these comparisons to X-rays, cat scans, or airplane trips, they are talking about radiation. Radiation is energy that goes right thru you.When they are talking about radiation in food, soil, air or water, they are talking about radioactive fallout, which is giving off radiation.Big difference, cause if you ingest it, its absorbed into your body, where it sits there in close proximity to cells, for a long time while continueing to emit radiation.
If your gonna die from radiation, it will get you within 30-60 days; watch the workers at fukdupashima.Deaths from radioactive fallout will take longer.Thyroid cancers first, lukemia later, and for generations after.
Saw they are still calling Chernobyl "The worst nuclear accident in history", haven't really got it yet that thats not the case, anymore.Gonna have to change that international scale for nuclear accidents, too.from 1-7 to at least 1-8, if not 1-10.Jim

[GeoffrySqueeb]

Well, I know that Nuclear Power is a pretty reliable form of energy, and wind and solar basically aren't. Who knows who is pushing for wind and solar, because they do not produce power all of the time! How can people not understand that you can't power your homes only when the wind blows? Enjoy the rolling blackouts. This video puts it pretty nicely:

Better Energy Plan

You ever think who is making us build giant wind and solar farms, even though they don't work as advertised? Could there be someone behind it all?

[bugler]

You might find interesting the following article about the coming nuclear disaster: Japan's Earthquake - Natural Or Engineered?

Now the Mexico Guld disaster seems like a picnic when it is extremely terrible.

[dutchdivco]

Geoffrey

If what you are looking for are reassurances that 'It can't possibly happen here', well, as you demonstrated in your first post, you can certainly find plenty of such reassurances, from nuclear industry experts, and Gov't regulators.
If you are looking for those to argue the other side, the responces to your post make it obvious that their are plenty "tree hugging anti-nuke hippies" to argue 'it could, can and will happen here.'
If you are truly interested in an answer to your question, wouldn't it be great of you could find someone with the resources to really research the question, who would be equally unswayed by the arguments of either those with a vested interest in Nuclear Power, or those who might be basing their arguments on fear.Who would have the skill set to objectively evaluate accurately risk and have a strong motivation to do so.
We have such an entity; The Insurance industry. Thats what they DO.
If they detirmined that the 'nuclear experts' are right; that Chernoble was due to antiquated soviet technology, was basically being held together with baling wire and bandaids, and that such a thing couldn't happen here, they would jump to offer to insure nuclear power plants.Collect premiums on something your never going to have to pay out claims on; a dream come true!
If, on the other hand, they detirmined that it is possible that a nuclear catastrophe COULD occur at a modern plant in North America, but that even if that happened, that there are so many redundant safety features that there would be no 'collateral damage'; no property damage, loss of life, etc. beyond the plant, then they would be happy to offer the operators liability insurance, while refusing to offer the owners plant insurance.
They offer neither.All have to be funded by Gov't backed loan guarantees, because no one who's job it is to figure the odds, likes the bet.
Insurance companies insure all sorts of things. No 'Big project' (commercial project) can happen without insurance of some sort.Movies are insured against the star dieing half way thru production, the twin towers were insured, both during their construction and once completed, etc.
And yet these cold, pragmatic money grubbing a**holes looked at nuclear power, and said,..."Pass".Nuf said? Jim

[brenie]

Hi Dutch and others. Did you say 'We have such an entity; The Insurance industry. Thats what they DO' ?
That would be the same insurance industry that paid out millions of $ on the 'three towers' I presume after a full and indipendent professional investigation. Oh yes we can trust them for sure !

Regards, Bren.

[Altair]

Nuclear energy is easily the most polluting energy source we have, well above fossil fuel.
The radioactive residue has to be put somewhere, but of course, nobody wants it. It will heavily pollute the environment where it is stored, for thousands of years. That's why most nuclear plants are stocked full of spent fuel.

The second source of pollution is much less obvious, but still important; it is the large amounts of heat that are generated during operation of the reactors, and that have to be disposed of, usually by rejecting it as hot water in the adjacent lakes and rivers.

The modern reactors are said to be very safe, but that's only as long as everything is working correctly. If something major happens, the whole plant immediately becomes a liability because EVEN when shut down, every nuclear reactor needs 3 highly important things:

1- A constant supply of clean water to continue the constant cooling of decay heat in the reactor, and also in the spent fuel pool.
2- A stable and constant supply of electricity to run all the controls and equipment.
3- A constant supervision by trained and qualified personel.

If one of those 3 items suddenly disappears, a catastrophe will be the result.

So how can the proponents of nuclear power guarantee that those 3 conditions will always be present ? Nobody can.

A nuclear reactor CANNOT be shut down and left with the door locked, unless it has been previously totally emptied of all the fuel, and that also the spent fuel pool has been emptied too, and all that fuel has been transfered somewhere else. That may take at least one to two weeks of work.

So what do you think would happen if a sudden cataclysm were to damage part of the plant ?
The answer is right in Japan.

[Altair]

Another thing,
the only reason I can see why the proliferation of nuclear energy steadily continues, is simply because those things cost a FORTUNE each, and the politicians who decide to support this technology only look at monetary side !

They know absolutely nothing about the pros & cons of the technology itself, but only see that as the perfect means to stimulate the "economy", while placing themselves in a higher situation of power.

It only money, money, money, money ...
And they think they're promoting a better and cleaner energy source.
Makes me sick.

[aljhoa]

Nuclear Incidents “Worse Than Three Mile Island”

In July, 1959, the site suffered a partial nuclear meltdown that has been named "the worst in U.S. history", releasing an undisclosed amount of radiation, but thought to be much more than the Three Mile Island disaster in 1979. [21]Another radioactive fire occurred in 1971, involving combustible primary reactor coolant (NaK) contaminated with mixed fission products.
Santa Susana Field Laboratory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
YouTube - Simi Valley Nuclear Disaster

The Church Rock Uranium Mill Spill occurred in New Mexico, USA, in 1979 when United Nuclear Corporation's Church Rock uranium mill tailings disposal pond breached its dam. Over 1,000 tons of radioactive mill waste and millions of gallons of mine effluent flowed into the Puerco River. Local residents used river water for irrigation and livestock and were not immediately aware of the toxic danger. In terms of the amount of radiation released the accident was comparable in magnitude to the Three Mile Island accident of the same year and has been reported as the largest radioactive accident in U.S. History.
Church Rock uranium mill spill - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Al

[dutchdivco]

brenie

Firstly, you said "First we eat the rich, marinated a few herbs could be palatable." Sorry, but even if you marinate excrement in herbs, its still not palatable.Perhaps we could RENDER them, and use the tallow to make candles?
Secondly, I was not meaning in any way to be praising the 'Insurance indiustries.They are money grubbing *******s, who profit from others misery.
What I was saying is they access risk for a living; thats what they do. And if they refuse to insure something, its because of their very money grubbing nature that you CAN trust that the something is a bad idea.In the US, another thing they refuse to insure, that the Gov't then steps in to insure;
You can get flood insurance, from insurance companies, but not if you live in a flood zone. A flood zone is a geographical area where because of the geography, it is assured that periodically the area will flood.So, the insurance company says "Nope, ain't going there!" The Gov't steps in, and so people are building houses, businesses roads, etc. and every so often they get flooded, and the Govt forks out $ to re-build.
In short, yes, you CAN trust the insurance companies; when they refuse to insure something, its because its a BAD idea.Nukes are a BAD idea. Thats the point I was making.And yeah, the Insurance execs might make good candles, after their rendered; if they don't stink too much! LOL Jim

[o541o]

Firstly, you said "First we eat the rich, marinated a few herbs could be palatable." Sorry, but even if you marinate excrement in herbs, its still not palatable.Perhaps we could RENDER them, and use the tallow to make candles?...And yeah, the Insurance execs might make good candles, after their rendered; if they don't stink too much! LOL Jim

Just so you know, pigs will eat most anything. A fitting end for those "swine"

And BTW you're correct. The very fact that they won't insure a Nuke facility speaks volumes.