Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Nuclear power

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Space-X and NASA aren't a PPP. NASA offered a partnership, but Space-X refused.
Offtopic, so I will be short. You are making things up. Both NASA, SpaceX, media, academia, internet, basically everyone and their dog call their relationship "private-public partnership". Yeah, I know, I know, it is successful, so it cannot be private-public partnership, according to you. *rolleyes*

End of topic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EdA
I read the article: lots of bad stuff. Far less clear about causation, though (and the article notes that at the bottom). Given all the other stuff we've been putting into the environment during the same period, more rigorous studies would be a boon.

I get it that adequate studies haven't happened. But did I miss the part of the article that discussed "suppressed studies"? What was suppressed?

Thanks,
Alan

P.S. Personally, I'm for carbon fee+dividend to create a level playing field for renewables. I favor extending the life of the current nuclear fleet (as long as it can be done "safely", I have no idea what that really means in that industry), until we can replace with renewables+batteries. I would argue for outright subsidies to the most efficient natgas facilities to keep them available for unforeseen problems in the future -- closed down nearly all the time, brought back to life only for emergencies. Economics and increasing availability of cheap renewable energy + batteries should result in closing all the coal plants (especially if we stop fighting the trend, a la Orange one) and should also start cutting down the natural gas business, maybe rapidly.
 
Difficult to prove causation with radiation since the effects don't appear until many years later and it's easy to point to confounding factors. The tobacco companies rode that horse for many years.

The cover up was for the Russian rainmaking which dumped massive amounts of radioactive waste on Belarus to spare Moscow and then covered up the rainmaking operation and the radiation readings on Belarus.

"No one told the Belarusians that the southern half of the republic had been sacrificed to protect Russian cities. In the path of the artificially induced rain lived several hundred thousand Belarusians ignorant of the contaminants around them.
The public is often led to believe that the Chernobyl exclusion zone, a depopulated 20-mile circle around the blown plant, safely contains Chernobyl radioactivity. Tourists and journalists exploring the zone rarely realise there is a second Chernobyl zone in southern Belarus. In it, people lived for 15 years in levels of contamination as high as areas within the official zone until the area was finally abandoned, in 1999.
 
Eight Years After Fukushima, Removal of Reactor Fuel Begins
8 years to start unloading stored spent fuel, 2-4 years to complete? Toshiba built special robot, very dangerous if another quake, costs for clean up continues to rise, core condition still unknown, must work remote as very high radiation, other problems of course.
You'll see other reports.

Clean up details still being worked on. Melted Cores condition/locations still unknown est. 40 years?
Seems to me clean up may match the cost originally spent to build the entire 50 Nuke in Japan. (minus the interest payments).
Fukushima's Final Costs Will Approach A Trillion Dollars Just For Nuclear Disaster | CleanTechnica

WTO upholds South Korean ban on Fukushima seafood | DD News

Is it really safe for people to move back ??
 
In the 33 years since the world's largest nuclear disaster at Chernobyl Power Plant, the area around the abandoned city has become a fascinating laboratory for biologists. In the absence of humans, plants and animals have reclaimed the landscape.

On first glance it seems the wildlife there was thriving. But if you dig a little deeper, according to Canadian scientist Timothy Mousseau, what you see paints a more disturbing picture.

He's been part of a long-term collaboration looking at the effects of prolonged, residual radiation on wildlife.


<snip>


In Mousseau's most recent study, he wanted to see what impact the varying radiation levels were having on the areas' rodents in terms of their genetic and physiological fitness, as well as looking at their population level as a whole.

"We've been tracking these small rodents," which Mousseau points out are near the bottom of the food chain for animals like wolves and foxes.

"The bottom line is that when you look at what the populations are doing in both the radioactive areas and the non-radioactive areas of the zone, it's very, very clear that the radiation is reducing fertility rates [and] reducing population sizes," added Mousseau.


Of the dozens of scientific papers Mousseau has published on the effects of radiation on the area's wildlife, he said they know the most the birds.

One of the early questions they were interested in was whether the birds had developed any kind of adaptation to deal with the effects of the radiation.

"We thought, well maybe there is some kind of magical adaptations that allow these birds to tolerate the radiation," said Mousseau. "We went to test that and quickly found out that there was no such evidence of any kind of [direct] adaptation."



Instead, he found the birds, especially in the more radioactive areas, showed many abnormalities:

"Almost everything we've looked at ends up showing some consequence in the more radioactive areas," said Mousseau.


<snip>
Full article at:
Cataracts, small brains, and DNA damage — Chernobyl's wildlife 33 years after the meltdown
 
  • Informative
Reactions: mspohr and Brando
Can you imagine solar, wind or storage at a nuclear energy conference? Neither can I. Because the nuclear industry could not care less about clean energy. Unlike the pathetic hypocrites employed by the nuclear industry the primary objective of the good people in the solar, wind and storage sectors is decarbonization.

US Wind Industry’s Response to Solar’s Rise: Embrace It
In a sign of the times, the American Wind Energy Association trade group will expand its flagship annual conference to include solar and storage.
 
These numbers do not reflect what has happened in the real world. Having gone through 17,000 reactor years at civil reactors, we have experienced three meltdowns in Japan, all at Fukushima Daiichi; at least one meltdown in the Soviet Union, at Chernobyl (though given the Soviet inclination to cover things up, there might have been others); one in Scotland, at Chapelcross; two in France, both at Saint-Laurent, but on different occasions; one in Czechoslovakia, at Jaslovské Bohunice; and three meltdowns in the United States, one each at Three Mile Island (Pennsylvania), Fermi (Michigan), and SRE (California).

In other words, instead of the projected number of CDEs, which we might have expected to be one or fewer, there were at least eleven in the real world. Instead of having a frequency of one in 20,000 reactor years, or more, or even of one in 10,000 for the oldest plants in the world, the number was about one in 1,550. And we can calculate that the likelihood of a CDE in the lifetime of a given plant is certainly not 0.2% or even 0.4%. In the real world, it has proven to be about 2% for the time the reactors have served, which is, on average, about three-quarters of their service lives. To calculate for the full service life, divide that figure by three-quarters, and you get 2.66%. So based on experience, the likelihood that any randomly chosen nuclear plant will have melted down when its time is up is 2.66%, or one in about 37.6.

Nuclear Power Is Not Safe | CleanTechnica
 
  • Helpful
Reactions: SmartElectric
Looks like HBO wanted to cash in on some good ol' fashioned fear mongering...

Maybe it will be historically accurate.... but the trailer doesn't give me much hope :(


I withdraw my previous criticism of the Chernobyl series on HBO. I found it fairly balanced and the writers seemingly did their best to keep the events historically accurate. I think that acute radiation poisoning is just so alien to everyday experience perhaps even more so for people in the nuclear industry. To some extent our chief concern is really contamination not radiation. Levels of radiation high enough to have a relatively immediate effect are so high that they're really unimaginable.

Plus Shill'en-berger hated it which made me like it even more :)
 
  • Love
Reactions: Brando
There's also an accompanying podcast available Kai Ryssdal interviews the shows writer and goes over some of the more incredible events. I've done a lot of reading on the events that led up to the disaster but not nearly as much concerning the aftermath. The denial was apparently very real. The shift chief was told several times that the reactor had blown apart and he refused to believe it.

There's also one scene in which people in Prypiat are amazed by the light from the exposed core (not knowing that's what it was). The radiation was ionizing the air and smoke above the reactor...... there are several independent report of this....
 
  • Informative
Reactions: SmartElectric
Very very few seem to understand radiation isn't so problematic - your skin and clothing can stop most alpha & beta particles - is that right? @nwdiver will probably know. (unless high gamma or x-ray radiation). So really we should monitor FOOD for contamination. Breathing in particles that get trapped in the lungs not a good thing. Of course the Feds mostly stopped all monitoring programs. including food testing. When I was growing up in Utah, milk was always tested.

side note: Hershey chocolate was rumoured to have bought up contaminated milk cheap, froze it, waited 90 days and then they could thaw and use the milk. Just an urban legend? or did it really happen?? I don't know. Depends exactly what the contaminate actually were.

But IF the radioactive particle (contamination) get inside your body - that is the real risk. Now the radiation from the radioactive decay will be right next to your cells and now cellular damage is a real risk - DNA damage and cancers might start.

Anyway, wind/solar so cheap and fast to build and even battery storage useful and better than Natural Gas turbines. But with opportunity to steal tax payer dollars to have 8-12 year reactor projects - corruption, greed and temptation are abundant.
 
Very very few seem to understand radiation isn't so problematic - your skin and clothing can stop most alpha & beta particles - is that right?

That was a slightly irritating part of the series.... they somewhat used radiation and contamination interchangeably. For the most part the protective clothing people wear around nuclear sites is protection against contamination. Any radiation it would stop would also be stopped by skin or regular clothing. You just don't want to inhale contaminated particles or bring any of it home with you.

While alpha and beta emitters are not harmful externally they are VERY harmful internally. Alpha radiation does ~20x more biological damage compared to gamma radiation.
 
Downplaying the danger of Chernobyl

Downplaying the danger of Chernobyl | Letters

Tom Allan’s report of his holiday inside the Chernobyl exclusion zone (Nuclear reaction, Travel, 25 May) was both misleading and dangerous in its assertions. He gives the impression that the radiation dangers are minimal: “less radiation risk than on a single transatlantic flight”, according to his ornithologist Belarusian guide, Valery Yurko.

The problem around Chernobyl is not average radiation exposure but the millions of highly radioactive hotspots of radioactive particles spewed from inside the destroyed Chernobyl reactor core. The entire exclusion zone area has suffered from serious forest fires in the 33 years since the catastrophe, re-suspending these hot particles into the atmosphere and spreading them around.

I would recommend Mr Allan re-read the chilling warning in the incisive article by Dr Kate Brown of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology seven weeks ago (Chernobyl’s disastrous cover-up is a warning for the next nuclear age of radioactivity, 4 April), based on her excellent new academic study Manual for Survival: A Chernobyl Guide to the Future.
 
Green Energy (Wall St. guy, so trust but verify) How do we prevent or regulate or prevent monopolies?
Costs going down - think your electric bill will be allowed to follow this trend?
Anyway, a lot of interesting points and trends.

My bias, I seriously doubt reactor story always been a rosy story that never actually happens. $8 billion budget $30 billion after cost over runs - Labor's fault? I never heard of these reactor builders becoming millionaires $22 billion of excess labor costs??? And fracking 128 times?? hard to believe.

Still interesting watch:

 
John Pilger, reveals what the news doesn’t – that the world’s greatest military power, the United States, and the world’s second economic power, China, both nuclear-armed, may well be on the road to war.
Nuclear war is not only imaginable, but planned. The greatest build-up of NATO military forces since the Second World War is under way on the western borders of Russia.
On the other side of the world, the rise of China is viewed in Washington as a threat to American dominance. To counter this, President Obama announced a ‘pivot to Asia’, which meant that almost two-thirds of all US naval forces would be transferred to Asia and the Pacific, their weapons aimed at China.
A policy which has been taken up by his successor Donald Trump, who during his election campaign said “We can’t continue to allow China to rape our country and that’s what they’re doing”.
Filmed on five possible front-lines across Asia and the Pacific over two years, the story is told in chapters that connect a secret and ‘forgotten’ past to the rapacious actions of great power today and to a resistance, of which little is known in the West.

Distributed by Sideways Films To be the first to watch more full length documentaries, subscribe here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCb7x...

Welcome to Reel Truth History, the home of gripping and powerful documentaries. Here you can watch both full length documentaries and series that explore some of the most comprehensive pieces of world
history.


History you should know. How your government uses/studies our environment/people.
 
Can you imagine solar, wind or storage at a nuclear energy conference? Neither can I. Because the nuclear industry could not care less about clean energy. Unlike the pathetic hypocrites employed by the nuclear industry the primary objective of the good people in the solar, wind and storage sectors is decarbonization.

There are thousands of reasons not to care about climate change. Carbon-free sources putting the hate, or neglect, on one another achieves it here on TMC. A friend recently leaving solar, told me the culture was too gung ho.

Pollux, natural gas doesn't need subsidy. That's why it's "The Blob", in my view. Used CT can be bought <$1/watt. New combined cycle (CCGT) for about a $1, as well. The gas isn't free, like sun, but it isn't pricey either. Many championing solar costing "$1/watt", or "breaking the buck", aren't economically weighing in the capacity factor (~20%), making $5 a figure closer to solar's install cost (before batteries, or duck curve saturation make cost recovery challenging). Sources should be recognized by their generation contribution; the way RPS compliance is measured and the way AGW says "thank you".

People fight. This is the internet. Frankly, if CO2 were more important we wouldn't. We wouldn't close Pilgrim, Diablo Canyon, etc. We wouldn't have Joe Manchin the Democrats point person, on ENW. So many wouldn't believe "everyone wants a truck", who instead believe natural gas is "Clean" (thanks EPA)...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pollux