Nuclear power

ninky_2

julieq wrote: »

Current population where? The growth in energy usage is not in the West, it's in the undeveloped parts of the world, where the people have already been born.

that's as maybe. but we haven't run out of oil yet have we? the reduction needs to be in the future. the benefit of being human is we should be able to plan into the future and see that the resources that we are currently relying on to sustain the lifestyles of current world population are not sustainable. the choice currently is to switch to highly risky resources (nuclear) or make a conscious decision to reduce population over generations.

there are a few animals such as pike that will increase in numbers until they basically reach crisis point and the resources can no longer sustain leading to sudden rapid decrease in numbers through death. i'd like to think we had a better way of planning our future than pike. i'd also like to think that the plan was not to use increasingly unpalatable resources (nuclear).

ninky_2

FTBFun wrote: »

This would only work with legislation. Are there compulsory abortions after the first/second child? Its not that straightforward and would take far too long to make any kind of impact, given how life expectancies are at the moment.

why? if people were made aware of the impact their choice to reproduce would have not just on humanity as a whole but on their own potential offspring i would have thought they would be rational enough to limit reproduction.

this is what i have done. am i just more intelligent than other people?

System

The reason you haven't had children is because of the impact on humanity?

ninky_2

Joeskeppi wrote: »

The reason you haven't had children is because of the impact on humanity?

one big reason along with others that are equally as rational such as a better standard of living for myself.

nicko33

ninky wrote: »

if people were made aware of the impact their choice to reproduce would have not just on humanity as a whole but on their own potential offspring i would have thought they would be rational enough to limit reproduction.

Is that what they do in Africa, with the wars, disease and famine?
They think "I'll be bringing my child(ren) into a world of starvation, illness and risk of painful death, maybe it would be best not to" ?

Do you think they don't already know what kind of life their children are going to have?

ninky_2

nicko33 wrote: »

Is that what they do in Africa, with the wars, disease and famine?
They think "I'll be bringing my child(ren) into a world of starvation, illness and risk of painful death, maybe it would be best not to" ?

Do you think they don't already know what kind of life their children are going to have?

empowerment and education of women is the only way forward. sperm is easy to come by. human incubators less abundant. cut off the access (through empowerment and access to contraception) and inclination to use them (through choice provided by education) and you get decline in birthrates.

many do think "it would be best not to" and take desperate measures to abort babies with often horrible consequences. reproduction if often not a conscious decision in these situations which is why it is even more important for those who do have the power of choice (in the west) to use it wisely.

A._Badger

blueboy43 wrote: »

I'm all for nuclear power as despite the inherent risks, its worth it.

However "nor even much impact on the area around Chernobyl" seems to understate the increase in cancers a little.

Not the case, actually. It's worth googling for scientific studies on the Chernobyl area. Many of the cancer cases have now been shown to have resulted from the atrocious levels of industrial pollution in the area.

Sadly, Chernobyl has become an urban myth and the research done into the real effects of the accident there are largely ignored. Probably because they don't make nice scary headlines for the Mail or the Grauniad.

For a quick digest, have a look at Roddy Campbell's guest post in the Telegraph, yesterday

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100079763/nuclear-power-some-perspective/

ninky_2

A._Badger wrote: »

Not the case, actually. It's worth googling for scientific studies on the Chernobyl area. Many of the cancer cases have now been shown to have resulted from the atrocious levels of industrial pollution in the area.

Sadly, Chernobyl has become an urban myth and the research done into the real effects of the accident there are largely ignored. Probably because they don't make nice scary headlines for the Mail or the Grauniad.

For a quick digest, have a look at Roddy Campbell's guest post in the Telegraph, yesterday

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100079763/nuclear-power-some-perspective/

the truth is that you can't always prove what triggered cancer many years in the future so how on earth could they have proved this?

we know that radiation causes the dna damage that causes cancer and we know that the levels of radiation the population were exposed to were high enough to cause that dna damage. that there might have been other industrial causes is neither here nor there tbh.

if radiation is safe i challenge every member of the pro nuclear lobby to go take a trip along with every member of their family to the exclusion zone around the damaged reactors. now that really would instil confidence in the population....

btw the very first assertion in that link you posted has already been proved wrong - dr josef oehmen says there will be no more radiation release than you'd get in a flight etc etc but the iaea are saying htat 400 millisieverts an hour are currently being released. that's way above what you'd be exposed to in an average flight. 100 millisieverts a year is considered the safe level of exposure before cancer risk is created.

A._Badger

ninky wrote: »

the truth is that you can't always prove what triggered cancer many years in the future so how on earth could they have proved this?

we know that radiation causes the dna damage that causes cancer and we know that the levels of radiation the population were exposed to were high enough to cause that dna damage. that there might have been other industrial causes is neither here nor there tbh.

if radiation is safe i challenge every member of the pro nuclear lobby to go take a trip along with every member of their family to the exclusion zone around the damaged reactors. now that really would instil confidence in the population....

There are plenty of detailed studies referenced in the link I quoted earlier. You might come away better informed if you read them.

Hysteria gets us nowhere. Though I realise it often passes for debate in Guardianista and Daily Mail land.

d123

ninky wrote: »

if radiation is safe i challenge every member of the pro nuclear lobby to go take a trip along with every member of their family to the exclusion zone around the damaged reactors. now that really would instil confidence in the population....

You can actually go for a tour of Chernobyl now, right into the old exclusion zone (to 100 meters of the reactor).

ITINERARY

We usually start our Chernobyl tour
at 9 a.m.

SoloEast's staff will meet you at the departure point, check passports, dress code, etc. If you need to be picked up at your location we can do that too - just let us know.

Drive to Chernobyl with passing "Dytyatky" (on the border of the 30-km "Zone of Estrangement"). We show you a documentary you'll like during 2 hours ride.

Arrival to Chernobyl. Meeting with the leadership of "Chernobylinterinform" Agency.

On the way to Power Plant we pass 10-km border and check point.

Make a stop at the cooling chanel to feed the fish (cat fish if it's worm enough)

Sightseeing of reactor # 4(from 100 m. distance).

Stop near the "Red forest".Visit to Pripyat. Sightseeing of "Dead town" (hotel, school, ferris wheel, swimming pool, etc).

Return to Chernobyl. Lunch.

Calling in "Opachychi" village, meeting with "resettlers", people who have moved back to their villages after evacuation(optional).

Important - Passage to "Rossokha" village, cemetery of military machineries - ACCESS FORBIDDEN BY THE GOVERNMENT STARTING APRIL 2008

Passage through Control Point "Dytyatky". Measuring of radiation.

Return to Kiev. (Back in Keiv around 6 p.m.)