So, the level 5 rating (i.e. the danger rating on par with TMI) is for reactors 2 and 3. reactor 4 has a level 3 rating at this time. A level 3 rating would be 100 times less dangerous than a level 5…so, that seems to indicate that while everything isn’t beer and skittles quite yet, they are more worried about reactors 2 and 3 than reactor 4…at this time. Things could obviously change.
Now, you may not trust them (many in this thread don’t, and not all of their skepticism is stuff, fluff and nuffin…there are valid reasons not to take everything from these people completely for granted), but they are saying the water levels in the pool ‘is secure’…and that jibes with other stuff I was reading saying that they were successful in getting the fire hoses into position and get the water on target to fill it up.
Like I said, you can believe what you like, 'luci. There is a lot of information out there, and a lot of it is conflicting. When experts are brought in, what I look for is are they actually over there in Japan working the issues. For some, they might be over there, but they might not be directly involved (and so getting information 2nd or 3rd hand). Or they might be back here in the states and know someone over there who is trying to pry some time loose to give them a brief or some info.
Well, that’s fine then! Serve it up! I found the cites that straight-up contradict you in about one minute flat. Outside of “stuff I was reading”, what are you offering? How hard can it be, if yours is the facts of the matter? You were sure enough about your facts to rub my nose in them, now you can’t find them?
I’m not talking “warm and fuzzy feeling”. I’m saying that Fukushima Daiichi was hit by a 9 magnitude quake and a 10m tsunami, and we’re pretty far from a Chernobyl situation. That’s pretty reassuring to me.
OTOH, the reactors in St. Petersburg (the original St. Petersburg in Russia, that is) and Kola are scaring the shit out of me. They’re constructed the same way as Chernobyl was. And the combination of anti-nuke hysterics ans bean-counting CEOs does pretty good to prevent building new, safe reactors to replace those time-bombs. If this were the Pit, I could probably tell you what I think about that.
[QUOTE=xtisme]
Well, that’s fine then! Serve it up! I found the cites that straight-up contradict you in about one minute flat. Outside of “stuff I was reading”, what are you offering? How hard can it be, if yours is the facts of the matter? You were sure enough about your facts to rub my nose in them, now you can’t find them?
[/QUOTE]
I provided you a cite from CNN that at least partially backs up what I was saying. If you didn’t bother reading even the parts I quoted, well, that’s not my lookout. If you want a cite specifically about the use of fire hoses to pump sea water into the damaged reactors (though to me this is like asking me to cite that water is wet, considering the fact that I’ve probably read about it from a dozen sources), here is a cite that mentions it:
It’s an older cite from Friday, but it was the first of, oh 21,000 results on Google from typing in ‘filling reactors in Japan using fire hoses’…
Does mercury need to be radioactive to make you mad as a hatter? Nope. The everyday kind that is constantly spit out of the moon bats’ coal plants will do the trick.
How many people in this thread know of someone killed by a nuclear plant? How about in an auto accident? Lightning strike? Goat flu?
I have known people who died in car wrecks. I saw a squirrel killed by lighting from less than 100’, that was close enough for me. No goat flu or nuke deaths in my circle though, despite living a county away from a nuke plant and getting much of my electricity from it.
I don’t know anyone killed by smallpox, influenza, measles, the black death or any other infectious diseases. Most people in fact that did die, did so from cancer.
We build vacation homes right on the coast, which is where 100% of tsunamis come ashore. I suppose that is fine with you? Not to mention amphibious sharks.
We have these things called tsunami warnings. When they go off, people run.
Geneticists and nuclear scientists are teaming together to create a nuclear power plant that will get up and run for its life in the event of a tsumani warning.
Nuclear enthusiasts are thrilled. “Finally, a sensible approach to energy!”, one was quoted as saying.
Because there is risk in doing anything, or in doing nothing. So showing that nuke plants are dangerous is just saying something everyone knows. To make a case for shutting them down you would have to describe some realistic alternative that would make life better and safer, which your side never does.