The Earth is on Life Support

So what's the time frame for shutting down every nuclear plant and replacing it with a different energy source. The OP may scoff that it's not expensive but that just shows his lack of research on the subject.

Or is the intent to shut these down without replacing them thereby sending economy's to collapse and people to die?

Originally posted by kro32
I also find it hard to believe that a plant that produces electricity doesn't have fail safes for itself to keep going in the event of an emergency.

The op simply did not give us enough information to make an informed decision on the validity of his theory.

My theory was not very complicated, spend 2 minutes on researching on Wikipedia or even easier watch a Youtube presentation and you'll understand how a nuclear power timebomb, I mean plant, works.

You are a classic example of someone who is faced with brutally honest facts and in denial chooses to focus on insignificant negatives to distract from an issue far more dire. Whatever makes you feel better, but channel that compassion for your home planet and those you share it with, and you will understand that instead of trying to dismiss my point, the only positive path is to discuss and share solutions and information, not complain of a lack thereof.

reply to post by RenegadeScholar


I noticed how you typed alot while avoiding my questions. You are acting just as every other environmentalist acts. Throw out the dangers and demand immediate action without thinking about the consequences.

Originally posted by kro32
reply to post by RenegadeScholar

 

I noticed how you typed alot while avoiding my questions. You are acting just as every other environmentalist acts. Throw out the dangers and demand immediate action without thinking about the consequences.

What proof do you have that the nuclear reactors we currently have on the planet pose no long term threat?

Thats right, NONE.

We have already seen 4 reactors suffer critical meltdowns in the past 25 years.The after effects will be felt for hundreds if not thousands of years. How many more reactors need to go into a full meltdown before you wake up?

It's easy to say... 'Nuclear is dangerous, so let's decommission the plants' but you have to consider the big picture.

There is a HUGE amount of time, work, and money required to make this conversion to other energies.

Then, you have to factor in the costs for those energies themselves: initial investment, the environmental impact just for building them and maintaining them, new infrastructure, individual costs, material, reliability, lifespan, etc.

So, as much as we all want nuclear to disappear, you first need to have something in place, before simply flipping the switch. It's obvious that just about any other source is less of a threat than nuclear, when it's the worst case scenario, but other energies have their effects on things as well over time. And there is no 'infinite source of energy' like people want to believe, as all energy requires something to generate it, and that in itself, is finite.

There is no quick and easy answer for all of this, so don't bother working yourselves up about it. The market will eventually go into a direction that supports energy demands. There is no one-size fits all. Just kick back, hang on for the ride, and hope that no more reactors go into meltdown. That's about all I can really say.

Peace

I'm pretty sure a solution was posted by someone..

Oh wait it was me.

and what exactly does this have to do with 2012???? to be honest yes i hear you and agree but i also say that i would die from crossing the street today the chances of both are sooo slim its not gonna happen (cause im staying indoors all day!!! lol) but u get my drift, there is a chance sooo many different things could or would happen theres no point worrying about them all of corse having knowledge in case it does happen is a good thing but i for one wont be worring to much.

reply to post by kro32

Originally posted by kro32
If humans lived by being afraid of "what if's" we would never have left the cave.

I notice you offer no solutions so what do you suggest to replace them?

You don't replace them.....You take them down and crush them....

You change the way you live.....You change your habits, eliminating the things you think you need.....You no longer need the high paying job....You plant a garden....You ride a bike....You stop watching TV....You leave the internet and never return.....

You eliminate the need....

I'm soo glad to see this topic coming up more and more. I remember when the reactor in my home state ( MS.) had issues, most of you didn't even know about it. It amazes me.

We are so caught up in the comforts of technology and science we forget how short of time we have lived with it's usage as a crutch and our species has become one with it, we forget how we strived before and our children will grow up not knowing how we were REALLY meant to live and survive on this planet.

When the time comes and something does happen on a broad scale and the time WILL come, what then? Even if the reactors do go down with little problems we still have a whole nother set of issues mentally for most humans that cannot adjust with having no comforts of modern life.

I implore parents and this world to take notice now or just accept that we are on a collision course with destroying ourselves with the same tools we used to make ourselves seem invincible as race. Just my honest humble opinion.

reply to post by kro32


Kro32, you're all but outright attacking the OP. I think that some of the things you are bringing up the OP is assuming that the average joe reading it would understand or immediately think of. If you watch some of the public broadcast tv you'll eventually run into a program that discusses at length Nuclear power plants and the devastation an EMP event in our atmosphere would cause. It has been noted many times that while the more modern plants are "protected" it is not foolproof.

A Carrington event could easily knock out power for the area and yes a diesel generator would kick in. In the event that they did not or were effected, then the plant would begin to meltdown within days. The cooling pools would not be pumping the solutions through and it would most like evaporate. Similarly to how Fukushima began it's meltdown within a couple days.

Yes, a solution is the abandonment of said technology however we would need to figure out what to do with all the existing material and what would take its place. Coal plants are too toxic for the environment as well so our alternatives are solar, geo, wind, water, and some other combustion element. That is at least until the new technology is created.

Originally posted by RenegadeScholar
The solution should be obvious, the abandonment of nuclear power.

Implementing the HHO or salt water gas for cars, and even furnaces could be made to run on this is not so costly. It doesnt take a huge infrastructure change like other things, nor does it take upgrading your home by 100 000 dollars. Its small things that make people independent. However if there was a marketable area for devices and conversions, with safety being important, homemade solutions wouldn't blow up in your face.

The other thing, about the geothermal and tide. Geothermal would take some doing. Tide/wave. I bet those plants which are on the water, could be converted somewhat. I saw a video on third world grass roots wave generator, so I know the reason we make cost is because we have money. Instead of infinite projects that are possible in a moneyless resource society, where all it takes in ingenuity and volunteers.

S&F OP and kudos XplanetX for the videos. Chernobyl didn't seem to wake anybody up but Fukushima opened some eyes. Germany has implemented a plan to shut 'em down by 2022. The weather is lately unpredictable in the extreme and the earth seems bent on reminding us that we reside on a living planet. There's the Yellowstone caldera, New Madrid, San Andreas plus the couple off the northwest coast to consider with historical tsunamis. Wasn't there trouble at the git go with Three Mile? How many warnings are we supposed to overlook? Somehow I don't feel like there is a plan and the nuclear power plants across the nation are in the same state as our bridges and roads and levees and dams. No one has been minding the store. It was wrong to utilize nuclear power without a way of cancelling out the radiation from waste just like it's wrong to plastic the planet without a way to break it down. At least plastic has gotten some attention lately but radioactive waste, a truly serious long reaching concern, is left to wander the world as a toxic nomad in search of a home. I don't think it's prudent to wait until radioactive waste washes up onto the porch and we get out there with a broom to sweep it off.

Originally posted by kro32
Throw out the dangers and demand immediate action without thinking about the consequences.

His explanation was pretty clear.

The consequences of not taking immediate action far far far far far outweigh the consequences of disturbing our economy.

Because those problems pale in comparison to destroying the life sustaining ability of the planet...

Life support off only means we will all glow in the dark.

reply to post by RenegadeScholar


Why do you think all nukes need electricity for cooling? Why do you think that the sort of problem experienced at one particular plant is a problem at all plants? Why do you think that knocking out the grid would knock out the power at the plants?

reply to post by RenegadeScholar


I don't think you need not explain any further, you're clear as crystal...stay sharp.

Peace

if you shut them down in time, no time bombs

reply to post by InnerPeace2012


So you accept all of the assumptions made by other posters? You think that it is sharp and clear to make assumptions that could possibly be false? That would be a good idea if you wanted to push a false agenda such as those that people often claim that TPTB do.

Originally posted by kro32
If humans lived by being afraid of "what if's" we would never have left the cave.

I notice you offer no solutions so what do you suggest to replace them?

We may end up regretting leaving the cave if several Fukushima's happen at once. And why should us laymen have to offer solutions? We just point out a looming threat to all the smarty pants out there. They're all so brilliant so figure it out.