Nuclear power

1984ReturnsForReal_2

macaque wrote: »

if a nuclear power plant was planned to be located one mile from your house, would you object?

:rotfl:

Love it.....

The word hysterical was getting to me also.

Pointing out that they have 4 reactors with no way to control them is hardly being hysterical but wreaks of realism for sure to me.

ninky_2

nothing would please me more than in two weeks from now i am proved to be an hysterical yogurt knitter and the whole nuclear thing has blown over (no pun intended).

i'm quite scientifically minded however and all indicators are this will not be the case. at the moment i feel like crying tbh.

A._Badger

1984ReturnsForReal wrote: »

:rotfl:

Love it.....

The word hysterical was getting to me also.

Pointing out that they have 4 reactors with no way to control them is hardly being hysterical but wreaks of realism for sure to me.

What makes you think they have no way to control four reactors?

Still, thanks for proving my point.

ninky_2

A._Badger wrote: »

What makes you think they have no way to control four reactors?

Still, thanks for proving my point.

because the control mechanisms are kaput. broken. nul and void.

A._Badger

ninky wrote: »

because the control mechanisms are kaput. broken. nul and void.

And thanks to you, as well, Ninky. But do carry on believing what you clearly wish to believe.

Personally, I'll just keep an eye on websites written by nucelar inspectors, engineers, scientists and journalists who are informed by them.

The IAEA site is quite good:

http://www.iaea.org/

I don't think it's owned by Rupert Murdoch, Ernst Stavro Blofeld, !!!!!! Cheney or Exxon - but you can never be sure.

Kohoutek

ninky wrote: »

because the control mechanisms are kaput. broken. nul and void.

The "control mechanism" worked fine, all the reactors shut down immediately after the tsunami. It's the pumps that supply water to cool the reactors' cores that are broken.

1984ReturnsForReal_2

A._Badger wrote: »

What makes you think they have no way to control four reactors?

Still, thanks for proving my point.

Lol.


You haven't got a point. Just look at the pictures & that's without the damage underground & internally.

Or are you saying they drop all their pipework down through the sky & its made invisible by mirrors because the Japs are at the forefront of the environmental science developments?

:rotfl:


What they have is a few big boxes with dangerous stuff in them. Nothing more. Dont kid yourself.

1984ReturnsForReal_2

A._Badger wrote: »

And thanks to you, as well, Ninky. But do carry on believing what you clearly wish to believe.

Personally, I'll just keep an eye on websites written by nucelar inspectors, engineers, scientists and journalists who are informed by them.

The IAEA site is quite good:

http://www.iaea.org/

I don't think it's owned by Rupert Murdoch, Ernst Stavro Blofeld, !!!!!! Cheney or Exxon - but you can never be sure.

The IAEA is the world´s center of cooperation in the nuclear field. It was set up as the world´s "Atoms for Peace" organization in 1957 within the United Nations family. The Agency works with its Member States and multiple partners worldwide to promote safe, secure and peaceful nuclear technologies.

...............:rotfl:

The IAEA´s mission is guided by the interests and needs of Member States, strategic plans and the vision embodied in the IAEA Statute.

................:rotfl:



Oh by the way. Another fire & 2 workers missing........

A._Badger

1984ReturnsForReal wrote: »

...............:rotfl:

I'm glad you find the IAEA's statement funny.

Of course, rolling around the floor like that could be a sign of... hysteria.

1984ReturnsForReal_2

A._Badger wrote: »

I'm glad you find the IAEA's statement funny.

Of course, rolling around the floor like that could be a sign of... hysteria.

I find you funny. No sense of realism at all.

That's more than hysteria, its psychotic.