Required viewing for all you Nuke fans

[OracleOfCalgary]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3u_8frR0IpE

[peter12]

Haha, "brilliant" being the key-word. Seriously, when will Greenpeace realize that fearmongering doesn't work on your average citizen.

[photon]

Whew, good thing it won't be the same kind of reactor.. dodged a bullet there, good work Greenpeace! Without that video we'd have definately built the exact same reactor.

[MarchHare]

Anyone know when that video was made? Last year one of the co-founders of Greenpeace wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post praising nuclear power as a clean, safe, and reliable energy source and saying that he was wrong to protest it before.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...041401209.html

In the early 1970s when I helped found Greenpeace, I believed that nuclear energy was synonymous with nuclear holocaust, as did most of my compatriots. That's the conviction that inspired Greenpeace's first voyage up the spectacular rocky northwest coast to protest the testing of U.S. hydrogen bombs in Alaska's Aleutian Islands. Thirty years on, my views have changed, and the rest of the environmental movement needs to update its views, too, because nuclear energy may just be the energy source that can save our planet from another possible disaster: catastrophic climate change.

Look at it this way: More than 600 coal-fired electric plants in the United States produce 36 percent of U.S. emissions -- or nearly 10 percent of global emissions -- of CO2, the primary greenhouse gas responsible for climate change. Nuclear energy is the only large-scale, cost-effective energy source that can reduce these emissions while continuing to satisfy a growing demand for power. And these days it can do so safely.

[transplant99]

Thirty years on, my views have changed, and the rest of the environmental movement needs to update its views, too, because nuclear energy may just be the energy source that can save our planet from another possible disaster: catastrophic climate change.

Good for him.

Like many other situations in the world.....many times it takes a very long time to see what is or isnt a good idea and will or will not work.

[GoinAllTheWay]

So with an event like Chernobyl, how long till the area is somewhat safe again? How long does it take radiation like that to break down?

[ken0042]

As somebody who made their position as "anti-nuclear energy in Alberta" in the other thread, I have to say that this video isn't at all what I was talking about. I really don't see another accident like Chernobyl happening again- we've seen the aftermath and newer reactors are so much safer.

Originally Posted by GoinAllTheWay

So with an event like Chernobyl, how long till the area is somewhat safe again? How long does it take radiation like that to break down?

I think a couple of hundred years until people can live there again. However even now you can go there for very brief periods and be OK. IIRC they have even started shooting movies there, like 28 Days Later; where they need shots of an abondoned city.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by GoinAllTheWay

So with an event like Chernobyl, how long till the area is somewhat safe again? How long does it take radiation like that to break down?

Depends on the area, I'm pretty sure that the power plant will be encased in concrete for a few hundred years, I read there are still areas that are very hot.

[NuclearFart]

"Required viewing"? wtf did this teach me? That's 5 minutes of fear mongering propaganda and nothing else.
________
ASIAN COOKING

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by peter12

fearmongering doesn't work on your average citizen.

[JohnnyB]

This site http://www.kiddofspeed.com/ has a kind of cool look at some girl's journeys through the Chernobyl area. Interesting pics and whatnot. I think it's been posted on CP some time previously.

I wouldn't expect anything comparable to happen in Alberta. Nuclear energy may have it's problems, but it's far safer now than it was years ago.

[metallicat]

Originally Posted by ken0042

As somebody who made their position as "anti-nuclear energy in Alberta" in the other thread, I have to say that this video isn't at all what I was talking about. I really don't see another accident like Chernobyl happening again- we've seen the aftermath and newer reactors are so much safer.



I think a couple of hundred years until people can live there again. However even now you can go there for very brief periods and be OK. IIRC they have even started shooting movies there, like 28 Days Later; where they need shots of an abondoned city.

What about Hiroshima? How come people can live there?

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by oilers_fan

What about Hiroshima? How come people can live there?

Far, far, far lower levels of radiation were released by the A-bombs than was released at Chernobyl.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Far, far, far lower levels of radiation were released by the A-bombs than was released at Chernobyl.

The actual amount of fallout from the Hiroshima bomb was relatively low, as was the yield from the bomb itself. The design of those two bombs wer hideously primitive and wasted a great deal of bomb material for a very little explosion compared to todays bomb.

the warheads nowdays do 100 to 1000 times the explosive yield with far less fissionable material.

The bomb was also detonated relatively high over the city at 2000 feet which reduced fallout (attachment of bomb debris to ground debris).

[metallicat]

So are there any areas of Japan to this day that are "hot"?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by oilers_fan

So are there any areas of Japan to this day that are "hot"?

No more then standing in front of your microwave naked.