Idle Banter For non SV and non bike related chat (and the odd bit of humour - but if any post isn't suitable it'll get deleted real quick).![]() |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools |
![]() |
#11 |
Da Cake Boss
Mega Poster
Join Date: May 2007
Location: On a flying Horse
Posts: 9,992
|
![]()
They also don't tell us about a volcanoe in Southern Japan that has erupted, or of the nuclear facility at Onagawa as it prepared for a meltdown after the earthquake and Tsunami.
__________________
Suzy, yellow 2001 SVS. Kitty, V-Raptor 1000, ZZR1400<<its my bike now Pegasus! Hovis 13.8.75-3.10.09 Reeder 20.7.88-21.3.12 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
![]()
The problems are politics and enviromental and a good dose of stupidity.
You cant build new reactors coz the tree huggers wont let you...which are safer... So instead you keep old reactors...which are less safe...working well past their bedtime and then wonder why when they go pop. You have to wonder the logic of building reactors in a earthquake zone as powerful as Japan. If they can survive or work safely in extremes then fine...but any kind of risk and then you cant. Japan has very few energy resources so the nuclear option seemed ok...but I bet it is less ok now than a week ago. |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
![]()
I'll bet it isn't. What choice do they have? They have no natural resources to speak of so if they have any scense they will continue building them. The new GEN IV reactors are safer and hell... if a 1960s built reactor can withstand an R9 quake followed by one of the most horrendous Tsunamis known in living history without going BANG the way Chernobyl did then I say that makes them a pretty good bet for Japan... especially a this is a once in a 1000 year event.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
Noisy Git
Mega Poster
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax/Leeds
Posts: 26,645
|
![]()
It's just for a photoshoot
![]()
__________________
Currently Ex Biker
Now rebuilding a 63' fishing trawler as a dive boat |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
![]()
Who here has a degree in nuclear physics?
|
![]() |
![]() |
#16 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
![]()
not me
however the sea water has debris from 10000 houses in it.. if that doesn't fk up pumps what will..? |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 |
Noisy Git
Mega Poster
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax/Leeds
Posts: 26,645
|
![]()
I'm guessing nobody, but I'm guessing there are a few engineers around the place and judging by the response to the UK energy thread quite a few people with an interest.
But come to think of it there are a few ex rum and sodomy types on here, some of them must know a bit about nuclear stuff. Then again the last I remember about that was being inconvenienced at the Spanish border as a kid because of some leaky tube full of seamen floating in the harbour. Probably better the uninformed opinions ![]() The presence of a human factor shouldn't put people off discussing things, and if every non-expert kept out of these discussions all we'd have is the official view.
__________________
Currently Ex Biker
Now rebuilding a 63' fishing trawler as a dive boat |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
![]()
Remember that 99.9% of the voting public whom supposedly decide on whether nuclear power is a good thing or not are not qualified to make that choice. That is the glory of a democracy. Discussion on these types of topic, qualified or not, is healthy.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#19 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
![]()
If you say so
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#20 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
![]()
Indeed I do sir
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|