Honda Car Forum

Brian Stell wrote:
>>>> Safe,clean nuclear power plants. Time to build more of them.
>>>
>>>
>>> Ever heard of the nuclear waste problem?
>>
>>
>> Yes,one more part that has been stifled and progress halted by the
>> anti-nuke idiots.
>
>
> Would you like a nuclear waste dump in your town?

it really depends. here, we don't "handle" it, we just store it. if we
dealt with it properly, like everyone else, we'd reprocess it. so if it
were reprocessed, no problem. if it were properly stored, sure.
improper storage is your real concern, but again, a lot of fear is based
on misinformation.

>
> Would you recommend living near a nuclear waste dump
> to your child, nephew, pregant relative?

technically, you get more radiation from coal power station fly ash.
which is used for cinder block. which builds homes. and from granite.
which is used in homes. there are many sources of background
ratiation, and many parts of the country, where humans happily live
where background is much higher than any emissions from your friendly
local storage facility.

>
> If you answer yes to these then more power to you but
> you'll be the first person I've met that does.

it's nuts to freak without the full facts. sure, there's a lot of
misinformation around, on both sides, but the facts are plain: radiation
is part of our existance on this planet. we cannot avoid it. it makes
no sense to freak about the local power or storage facility if we're
getting higher doses from our basement that is full of radon & from the
cosmic rays that soak us every day of our lives. check out a bubble
chamber some time. it's just a foaming cauldron of vapor trails left by
the background radiation that is with us constantly.

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 06:23:48 -0700, jim beam <nospam@example.net>
wrote:

>Brian Stell wrote:
>>>>> Safe,clean nuclear power plants. Time to build more of them.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ever heard of the nuclear waste problem?
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes,one more part that has been stifled and progress halted by the
>>> anti-nuke idiots.
>>
>>
>> Would you like a nuclear waste dump in your town?
>
>it really depends. here, we don't "handle" it, we just store it. if we
>dealt with it properly, like everyone else, we'd reprocess it. so if it
>were reprocessed, no problem. if it were properly stored, sure.
>improper storage is your real concern, but again, a lot of fear is based
>on misinformation.
>
>>
>> Would you recommend living near a nuclear waste dump
>> to your child, nephew, pregant relative?
>
>technically, you get more radiation from coal power station fly ash.
>which is used for cinder block. which builds homes. and from granite.
> which is used in homes. there are many sources of background
>ratiation, and many parts of the country, where humans happily live
>where background is much higher than any emissions from your friendly
>local storage facility.
>
>>
>> If you answer yes to these then more power to you but
>> you'll be the first person I've met that does.
>
>it's nuts to freak without the full facts. sure, there's a lot of
>misinformation around, on both sides, but the facts are plain: radiation
>is part of our existance on this planet. we cannot avoid it. it makes
>no sense to freak about the local power or storage facility if we're
>getting higher doses from our basement that is full of radon & from the
>cosmic rays that soak us every day of our lives. check out a bubble
>chamber some time. it's just a foaming cauldron of vapor trails left by
>the background radiation that is with us constantly.

Neutreno's actually. extremely weakly interacting particles of unknown
mass or size, that barely react or interact with anything. . one of
the big projects going on in europe right now is the Neutreno factory
-which aims to fire a stream from the uk to china, direct.
http://hepunx.rl.ac.uk/uknf/

Good link to plug the only large-scale distributed computing project
out there... (and which is a part of the above project)

Muon1 - www.stephenbrooks.org/muon1

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 06:16:39 -0400, "Steve Bigelow"
<stevebigelowXXX@rogers.com> wrote:

>
>"flobert" <nomail@here.NOT> wrote in message
>news:ep95g15na5mcvfm78qgnng4vlv44sm8cls@4ax.com.. .
>>>Please explain exactly what Lithium-ion batteries will do in a crash.
>>
>> As has been well documented with Rc aircraft and especialy boats...
>>
>> When puntured, they have a tendency to catch fire, or explode. reason
>> is simple - LITHIUM.
>> Lithium + water --> lithium hydroxide + hydrogen + ENERGY
>
>How does that compare to a thin steel can full of 20 gallons of gasoline?

1) generally not mounted by amateurs.
2) you have a fixed quantity of fuel, which is a liquid with flamable
vapours. drain the liquid, move it away, no problem. a series of
batteries is both producing its own combustion fuel as it goes along,
PLUS lithium burns itself.

Puncturing a petrol tank does not automatically lead to fire.
puncturing a lithium based battery can. I don't have bond energy's to
hand, so i'm not sure if it'd be preferable to have it hydrogenate, or
combust. maybe both happens - i've yet to see it happen under
controlled conditions.

>

"jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote
Brian wrote
snip
> > Would you like a nuclear waste dump in your town?
>
> it really depends. here, we don't "handle" it, we just store it. if we
> dealt with it properly, like everyone else, we'd reprocess it. so if it
> were reprocessed, no problem.

Good lord. High level radioactive waste still results from reprocessing
spent nuclear fuel from power plants.

High level radioactive waste that is not spent fuel and so cannot be
reprocessed is still an outcome of nuclear power plant operations.

Lower level waste simply cannot be reprocessed and is of course still a
hazard.

I doubt it's only the U.S. who does not reprocess. Regardless, the reason
the U.S. does not reprocess (by federal law) is, for one, because of
concerns about plutonium proliferation: If this product of reprocessing gets
in the wrong hands, the production of nuclear weapons is facilitated.

Reprocessing is also expensive. Mining/enrichment of uranium remains far
cheaper than reprocessing.

You can't beef about how the high purchase cost of hybrid cars makes them
unsuitable and then disregard how the high cost of reprocessing makes it
unsuitable, all in the same thread. Or you can, but you'll be logically
inconsistent.

> if it were properly stored, sure.
> improper storage is your real concern, but again, a lot of fear is based
> on misinformation.

The fear is rationally based on misinformation like that you wrote above.

> > Would you recommend living near a nuclear waste dump
> > to your child, nephew, pregant relative?
>
> technically, you get more radiation from coal power station fly ash.
> which is used for cinder block. which builds homes. and from granite.
> which is used in homes. there are many sources of background
> ratiation, and many parts of the country, where humans happily live
> where background is much higher than any emissions from your friendly
> local storage facility.
>
> >
> > If you answer yes to these then more power to you but
> > you'll be the first person I've met that does.
>
> it's nuts to freak without the full facts.

The only one freaking here is you: You felt you had to dump an emotional
truckload of incorrect information on someone who whose concerts are
perfectly valid .

I do not oppose per se further construction and operation of commercial
nuclear power plants. I do resent the irrational religious fervor of many of
its advocates, resulting in the transmission of highly inaccurate
information which hinders, rather than helps, the reduction of U.S.
dependence on foreign oil.

Brian Stell <bstell@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
news:49AMe.2135$Z%6.1249@newssvr17.news.prodigy.co m:

>>>>Safe,clean nuclear power plants. Time to build more of them.
>>>
>>>Ever heard of the nuclear waste problem?
>>
>> Yes,one more part that has been stifled and progress halted
>> by the anti-nuke idiots.
>
> Would you like a nuclear waste dump in your town?

Not relevant;one selects the storage site based on sound engineering and
environmental principles.

Yucca Mountain,where it's not going to affect anyone,and it's secure.

>
> Would you recommend living near a nuclear waste dump
> to your child, nephew, pregant relative?
>
> If you answer yes to these then more power to you but
> you'll be the first person I've met that does.
>



--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

> I grew up in the midst of chemical plants in Louisiana and would
> trade a nuclear plant or storage facility for that in a second.

Wouldn't it be better to clean up the chemical plant?

"Leonard Caillouet" <no@no.com> wrote in
news:tUDMe.22620$Ji.10857@lakeread02:

>
> "Brian Stell" <bstell@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
> news:49AMe.2135$Z%6.1249@newssvr17.news.prodigy.co m...
>>>>>Safe,clean nuclear power plants. Time to build more of them.
>>>>
>>>>Ever heard of the nuclear waste problem?
>>>
>>> Yes,one more part that has been stifled and progress halted by the
>>> anti-nuke idiots.
>>
>> Would you like a nuclear waste dump in your town?
>>
>> Would you recommend living near a nuclear waste dump
>> to your child, nephew, pregant relative?
>>
>> If you answer yes to these then more power to you but
>> you'll be the first person I've met that does.
>
> The irony is that there are many nuclear waste dumps across the nation
> right now because of this attitude. Rather than sensibly storing the
> waste where it will be less likely to be a problem, we have it
> distributed all over the country. The fear of nuclear waste baffles
> me. You can easily detect it and deal with it. The effects are known
> and understood. Many of the same people who are so afraid of nuclear
> energy and waste don't realize that they have much more hazardous
> products nearby that they will never even know about. I grew up in
> the midst of chemical plants in Louisiana and would trade a nuclear
> plant or storage facility for that in a second. You can detect
> radiation easily. Do you know what you are breathing as a result of
> the nearby plants and even the chemicals in use in your home? The
> relative environmental impact of nuclear energy compared to even the
> cleanest of fossil fuel generation or petro-chemical production is so
> small that I have to wonder about the intelligence of those who are so
> petrified by it. Geez, even many of the products that are produced
> and used everyday in the chemical industry are more dangerous and
> impact more people than nuclear waste.
>
> Leonard
>
>
>

If you noticed,the poster asked simplistic questions to frame the matter so
that it SEEMS common-sense to be anti-nuclear.
While avoiding common sense completely.
How ironic.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

flobert <nomail@here.NOT> wrote in
news:s4n6g1d6b67mmortf8tjtieg922ud4can5@4ax.com:

> On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 06:16:39 -0400, "Steve Bigelow"
><stevebigelowXXX@rogers.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"flobert" <nomail@here.NOT> wrote in message
>>news:ep95g15na5mcvfm78qgnng4vlv44sm8cls@4ax.com. ..
>>>>Please explain exactly what Lithium-ion batteries will do in a
>>>>crash.
>>>
>>> As has been well documented with Rc aircraft and especialy boats...
>>>
>>> When puntured, they have a tendency to catch fire, or explode.
>>> reason is simple - LITHIUM.
>>> Lithium + water --> lithium hydroxide + hydrogen + ENERGY
>>
>>How does that compare to a thin steel can full of 20 gallons of
>>gasoline?
>
> 1) generally not mounted by amateurs.
> 2) you have a fixed quantity of fuel, which is a liquid with flamable
> vapours. drain the liquid, move it away, no problem. a series of
> batteries is both producing its own combustion fuel as it goes along,
> PLUS lithium burns itself.
>
> Puncturing a petrol tank does not automatically lead to fire.
> puncturing a lithium based battery can. I don't have bond energy's to
> hand, so i'm not sure if it'd be preferable to have it hydrogenate, or
> combust. maybe both happens - i've yet to see it happen under
> controlled conditions.
>
>>
>
>

Nonsense;gas,hydrogen,and electric vehicles all have specific hazards,and
one is not necessarily worse than the others.
And emergency workers are already practicing tactics to handle hybrids,and
toxic chemical spills from other sources.

And how often do you thiink these cells are going to be -punctured-?

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

In article <s4n6g1d6b67mmortf8tjtieg922ud4can5@4ax.com>, flobert
<nomail@here.NOT> wrote:

> On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 06:16:39 -0400, "Steve Bigelow"
> <stevebigelowXXX@rogers.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >"flobert" <nomail@here.NOT> wrote in message
> >news:ep95g15na5mcvfm78qgnng4vlv44sm8cls@4ax.com.. .
> >>>Please explain exactly what Lithium-ion batteries will do in a crash.
> >>
> >> As has been well documented with Rc aircraft and especialy boats...
> >>
> >> When puntured, they have a tendency to catch fire, or explode. reason
> >> is simple - LITHIUM.
> >> Lithium + water --> lithium hydroxide + hydrogen + ENERGY
> >
> >How does that compare to a thin steel can full of 20 gallons of gasoline?
>
> 1) generally not mounted by amateurs.
> 2) you have a fixed quantity of fuel, which is a liquid with flamable
> vapours. drain the liquid, move it away, no problem. a series of
> batteries is both producing its own combustion fuel as it goes along,
> PLUS lithium burns itself.
>
> Puncturing a petrol tank does not automatically lead to fire.
> puncturing a lithium based battery can. I don't have bond energy's to
> hand, so i'm not sure if it'd be preferable to have it hydrogenate, or
> combust. maybe both happens - i've yet to see it happen under
> controlled conditions.
>
> >

Hello,
You may be too young to remember the news stories related to the gas tanks
of Pintos exploding. I believe they were made by Ford. When other vehicles
crashed into the back of Pintos--the gas tanks would explode. Many people
were killed. You should do a google search for Pinto and you may be able
to find a some reports about this subject. They quit making Pintos due to
the explosions.
Jason

--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.

In article <5MBMe.7320$rR4.41@trnddc08>, "Doug McCrary"
<DougMcCrary@spamcop.net> wrote:

> Brian Stell <bstell@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
> news:49AMe.2135$Z%6.1249@newssvr17.news.prodigy.co m...
> > >>>Safe,clean nuclear power plants. Time to build more of them.
> > >>
> > >>Ever heard of the nuclear waste problem?
> > >
> > > Yes,one more part that has been stifled and progress halted
> > > by the anti-nuke idiots.
> >
> > Would you like a nuclear waste dump in your town?
> >
> > Would you recommend living near a nuclear waste dump
> > to your child, nephew, pregant relative?
> >
> > If you answer yes to these then more power to you but
> > you'll be the first person I've met that does.
>
> If the stuff is properly immobilized and shielded, why not?

In the county where I live, there is a nuclear power plant that stores
nuclear waste above ground in pools of water. I visited the plant several
years ago. I saw what looked like 4 huge swimming pools. Our guide told us
the nuclear waste was stored in the bottom of each of those pools of
water. They would prefer to store it in other areas but environmentalists
won't let them move it due to security and safety concerns. I should note
that no people have ever died as a result of the nuclear waste stored in
our county.
Jason

--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.