What the fuck? Seriously? Chernobyl style reactors, with so much spent fuel next to them they are running out of room? And they just want to keep them going?
Chernobyl was fucking bad, but at least it was a brand new reactor, one load of fuel, no spent fuel to burn, yadda yadda yadda. It only caused millions of early deaths from cancer, nothing to worry too much about.
But now they are keeping the old reactors going, which is just wrong. It’s wrong on so many levels.
I can just see it already, the blind true nuclear believer will somehow spin this so it’s just fucking OK with them, or it will somehow be “their” fault, the people who oppose nuclear, tis is their fault. Something.
In no way will it ever be just wrong. And dangerous. Because belief trumps reason and logic.These reactors are of an inherently unsafe design, which cannot be improved through upgrades and modernization, and some reactor parts are impossible to replace.
No fucking shit. The same thing is true for most of the old reactors in other countries as well. It’s an actual real danger, unlike the mythical runaway global warming bullshit.
Really? Yet we see a bunch of first generation (the really unsafe kind) reactors (like the Chernobyl style RBMK-1000) being “extended” with no study to show they are in any way safe.
And now of course some of them have 40 years or more of stored fuel right there at the plants. Multiple old unsafe reactors, with hundreds of spent reactor cores worth of fuel sitting right next to them. Talk about a huge fucking disaster waiting to happen.
Clearly you did not read before you responded. But that is OK, most idiots don’t. They don’t need pesky facts. Your truthiness is all you need to know what is right.
Yeah, asshats have already started threadshitting. Can’t blame them. How you gonna defend Russia and it’s dangerous reactors? You can’t very well say those old Chernobyl style reactors (including the actual Chernobyl reactors) are safe. Or that they should be run until they meltdown.
Or that the 40 years of spent fuel is no danger. Or that new reactors will replace them. It’s a serious problem.
Here we go again! :smack: Wonder what page count this one will get up to…and whether it will be 80% or 90% posts by our good buddy FXM.
Ok, so reading the article, it’s about Russia’s decision to extend the life of their (older) nuclear power plants (10 of them comprising 32 reactors in total). Reading between the lines, the reason they want to do this is that their alternatives are limited. They are behind on construction of new power plants (many of them newer nuclear designs), and these things currently comprise over 16% of Russia’s electrical energy production. Taking them offline would put a gaping hole in their energy production.
So, while I agree that keeping these old power plants going is an issue (yeah, they are ‘Chernobyl style reactors’, but they HAVE been upgraded with more modern safety equipment…and hopefully no one will be stupid enough to try a test where they shut off all the safety equipment that IS there and then take a reactor critical to see what will happen), what are the alternatives? Russia’s OTHER power generation industries aren’t exactly environmentally friendly either.
Anyway, while it’s a concern and actually IS a valid bitch, the OP has so jumped the shark on this issue that there is no point seriously discussing this OR even bitching about it, Pit style.
I live near safe nuclear reactors, and they don’t bother me at all. Safe nuclear energy is actually my source of electricity. I would be pissed if anyone shut it down for no good reason.
Only an insane person would support unsafe situations concerning nuclear power.
Dear FX, do you remember all the nuclear reactor disasters of the past? You know, like, all three? One caused no damage, one was due to massive administrative stupidity (where we can honestly say “we know better now”), and the other was due to a combination of a tsunami and an earthquake (and still killed/injured less people than the rest of the disaster).
Nonsense. Chernobyl had a partial meltdown of a different reactor before the big explosion in #4. That you, and most people, don’t know this, shows how ignorance is rampant when it comes to unsafe nuclear power. (the godless commies hid the accident, of course).
The other huge unsafe use of nuclear power was, of course, all the atmospheric testing, which spread nuclear waste over every bit of the planet before the wise voice of science convinced the insane to stop doing it.
Radio-cesium is fucking everywhere, mostly due to atmospheric testing. That released far more radiation than even the recent Japanese disaster, which I refuse to mention in this thread.
Jesus Fuck, why are you still here?! Everyone hates you, your threads are stupid, and I suspect your penis is quite small. Do us a favor and go clutter up some other board with your stupidity.
Really? Might be a good idea to test EVERY FUCKING one of the worlds reactors then. Because while I love safe nuclear energy, unsafe reactors make the baby Cecil cry.
Notice also how FX is now claiming that “safe nuclear plants” do not worry him and seems to be ok with it. :dubious:
Problem is that when you remember what he was doing in the other thread, it is clear that he is reaching now for the fallacy of shifting sand, or “we have always been at war with Eurasia” an Orwellian “total willingness to rewrite the past” point that is stupid once one looks at his recent past behavior.
Speak for yourself missy. I love this guy and I find his threads intellectually exciting. I can also tell you from first hand experience that his penis is quite large. His penis is so grand that other penis’ go flaccid and bow in its presence. You could only dream of such a glorious penis and if you are lucky in this life you might be blessed to find a penis that is half as stupendous and lucious as his.
Even the anti-nuclear psychopaths at Greenpeace, IN A REPORT PURPORTING TO SHOW THAT THE DEATH TOLL FROM CHERNOBYL SHOULD BE RAISED, only claim 250,000 deaths.
(The actual number put forth by legitimate scientists ranges from 20 to 60 thousand, fwiw.)
Your claim of “millions” is a lie. What does kill millions of people is the effects of continued fossil fuel burning, including both atmospheric pollution and global warming, that persist because the likes of you refuse to let nuclear energy become more widespread.