On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 09:14:28 -0700 (PDT), RHF
wrote:

On Mar 17, 10:52*am, bpnjensen wrote:
On Mar 17, 12:42*am, wrote:



On Mar 16, 7:49*pm, RHF wrote:

On Mar 16, 2:11*pm, wrote:

They (''They'') seyyyyyyyy Indian Point number three on the Hudson
River, bouts twinty four myles North of NYC, issa der Highest Risk Nuke
plant in America.
I am GLAD Grand Gulf isn't High Risk.
cuhulin

Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant # 3
in Buchanan, N.Y. {40 Air Miles to NYC}http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42103936...-asia-pacific/
*.
and... Prez "BO" {Obama} and the Obama Regime
Does Nothing Nothing Nothing : It's the Obama [BP]
Oil Spill in the Gulf Thing All Over Again and Again !http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...48b5a010301579

The Great Obama [BP] Oil Spill of 20&10http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.liberalism/msg/e2713a4781...
*.
It's The Obama [BP] Oil Spill ! -because- Prez Obama
and the Obama Regime Did Nothing Nothing Nothing !http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...09a7e1af7770d3
*.
Your Choice : The Real Bad 'Nasty' Nuke "Stuff"
-or- The Relatively Not As Bad 'Clean' Coal "Stuff"http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/4d72ef494dec66f9
*.
*.

This is an old headache . Unit one (supposed to be shut down in '76)
was athorium-fuelled -cycle reactor by design . *Didn't work out .- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

France, Russia and India are all going Thoriumin the next 5 years.

Lots of bugs have been worked out.

An Official with China [PRC] Health?Nuclear Agency
says they are rethinking / reviewing / reexamining the
30+ Nuclear Plants that they have in work.

I imagine that France, Russia, India and many others
are doing the same thing; Plus reviewing the Plants
that are already in-service too.
-shut-them-down-shut-them-down-shut-them-down-

Nuclear Power's Days Are Numbered and and getting fewer.
-just-say-no-nukes-just-say-no-nukes-just-say-no-nukes-

Better to Spend the Money wasted on more Nuclear
for a National Program to Put a 1~5 KW Array of Solar
Panels on Each and Every House in the USA.
-solar-to-the-people-solar-to-the-people-solar-to-the-people-

solar power to the people : not the corporations ~ RHF
.
FYI : China presently puts a New 'Clean' Coal Electrical
Power Plant In-Service Each Week.
-clean-coal-clean-coal-clean-coal-clean-coal-clean-coal-

*IF* 'Clean' Coal Electrical Power Plants Are Good
Enough For China [PRC] -then- Why Isn't 'Clean' Coal
Electrical Power Plants OK For America Too ? ? ?
.
.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...-nuclear-waste

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/facts.../en/index.html

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-co...mile-isle.html


It takes about ten years for a solar panel to replace the energy it
takes to make it. Then it will last about another ten years, just
enough to replace the next one. I'm certainly not opposed to wind and
solar, and certainly have their place, but we are talking megawatts
when the world needs terawatts. Melting down a nuke plant was supposed
to be Armageddon, but it simply hasn't tuned out that way.

China won't stop building it's nukes, neither will France, and I'll
bet a buck that Fukushima will be replaced by a nuke as well.

Here's a report published by Argonne National Laboratories on a
reactor design that reprocesses it's own fuel and breaks down high
level waste to low level, short half life waste to solve the disposal
problem.

http://www.anl.gov/eesa/pdfs/Advance...ign_Report.pdf


Educate yourself

Bill Smith

On 3/19/2011 1:55 PM, Bill Smith wrote:

Melting down a nuke plant was supposed to be Armageddon, but it
simply hasn't tuned out that way.

Sudden death by "Armageddon"? Maybe not...more likely slow, lingering
deaths. Just today (3/19), they said Iodine 131 was discovered in
Tokyo's city water supply. It ain't over until it's over. And with the
half-life of some of that nasty waste, it may not be over for 50,000
years or so.

On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 15:11:08 -0400, Joe from Kokomo
wrote:

On 3/19/2011 1:55 PM, Bill Smith wrote:

Melting down a nuke plant was supposed to be Armageddon, but it
simply hasn't tuned out that way.

Sudden death by "Armageddon"? Maybe not...more likely slow, lingering
deaths. Just today (3/19), they said Iodine 131 was discovered in
Tokyo's city water supply. It ain't over until it's over. And with the
half-life of some of that nasty waste, it may not be over for 50,000
years or so.

Did you read the links provided, especially the one about Chernobyl?

I did not say "sudden death" nor did I imply it. I agree, it ain't
over 'til it's over, but there's certainly no point in getting
hysterical.

The point I wished to make is that as severe as accidents like
Chernobyl are, it's not as bad as some would portray it. A million
deaths? Nonsense. Compare cost/benefit ratios in terms of both lives
and money, of all the ways there are to make the power we need, and
nuclear power is looks pretty good, all things considered.

Bill Smith