Quake Rocks Japan

Started by Don Ho, March 11, 2011, 02:13:38 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Rome

Just when you think Glen Beck can't possibly get any worse, this shtein rolls out of the sewer between his ears:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/14/glenn-beck-japan-earthquake-god_n_835573.html

What a vile disgusting piece of shtein motherfarger.

smeags

when all else fails, blame jehova.
If guns kill people then spoons made Rosie O'Donnel a fatass.

Quote from: ice grillin you on March 16, 2008, 03:38:24 PM
phillies will be under 500 this year...book it

Sgt PSN

Quote from: Sgt PSN on March 11, 2011, 11:10:28 AM
Absolutely. I can't wait for the "God did this to Japan for bombing Pearl Harbor" rhetoric.

Meh....close enough. 

MDS

so since Hiroshima and Nagasaki were payback for pearl harbor...this quake is double payback? or is it gods payback?

inquiring minds would like to know
Zero hour, Michael. It's the end of the line. I'm the firstborn. I'm sick of playing second fiddle. I'm always third in line for everything. I'm tired of finishing fourth. Being the fifth wheel. There are six things I'm mad about, and I'm taking over.

mpmcgraw

payback for Japan's car companies beating out the white man's car companies

SD

Quote from: QB Eagles on March 14, 2011, 01:03:27 AM
Quote from: Eagaholic on March 13, 2011, 06:56:52 PM
QuoteNotice that when things do go wrong, like in Three Mile Island or in this Japanese situation.... no one actually dies
You are basing this assumption on what, exactly?

TMI has been well-studied. Based on a conservative assumption about the (still not well understood) health effects of very low-dose radiation, there could be one excess cancer death worldwide as a result of what happened there. The Japanese situation could still change, but given what I know about how the plants operate, what I know about what has happened to the plants, and the expertise of the Japanese nuclear community, I'd be very surprised if this turned into something that affected the public (other than the lost electricity). I have a masters degree in nuclear engineering and have been working exclusively on reactor protection for over five years now, so I have some understanding of what is happening in those plants. I am not interested in being a shill for any industry though... my motivation is to help other people understand what is going on, and I'd do the same if what was going on was a lot worse. This is a condition that is literally getting better by the hour as the most radioactive parts of the core decay into safer isotopes. Remember that these cores have been shut down since the earthquake.

There were some people who died at the plants, not because of any accident or nuclear event, but because they got hit by a farging tsunami. It's actually pretty damn impressive the condition the plant is in, while they are stacking bodies like cord wood right down the street. In fact, if they had to, they might have been able to keep the plant running were it not for the loss of external grid power (due to washed away power lines), which powers the plant's pumps. There are probably some very heroic individuals who have been working at the power station these last few days.

QuoteBut this ignores the potential damage of a failed coal plant vs the catastrophic consequences of a nuclear meltdown, which is like comparing a space shuttle to a spitball. Btw, the pollution caused by even a dirty coal plant at any given time will be cleared from the atmosphere within months. The half life of uranium-235 is 700 million years (meaning that if a kilo of U-235 is washed out into the environment, dispersed into the atmosphere etc., in 700 million years there will still be a half a kilogram left of radioactive U-235. A least it's not like U-238, which has a half life of 4.5 billion years. That would be a bummer of an accident.

You have it exactly backwards. Long half-lives mean that the substance is much less radioactive (as in, it takes much longer to decay because it releases fewer radioactive particles). Uranium is quite safe for anything other than ingestion. You can safely hold it and you probably have a lot more of it around you than you think. It becomes much more dangerous when it decays into radon, which has a half-life on the order of a few days, and which is an imperceptible gas that you can breathe in.

The most problematic isotopes in nuclear accidents (or bombs) are cesium-137 and strontium-90. They both have half lives around 30 years. That's long enough to hang around, but short enough to still be intensely radioactive. And biologically, both elements get taken up into the body and kept there. But even with this nasty stuff, low doses are okay.

You may have heard about some venting of radioactive gas. That stuff is from the coolant and isn't so bad, especially when dispersed in the atmosphere. The meltdown potential is more serious because that's how things like cesium and strontium break out of the fuel rods. But right now, these reactor cores still have shielding and containment around them. They aren't throwing that shtein all over the area like Chernobyl did.

QB...taking yous to school

Rome

Yes, he really is.  It would be even cooler if he were posting his reassurances from fargushima, though.  That would be super.

Diomedes

Quote from: phillymic2000 on March 14, 2011, 02:39:49 PM
Its a helicopter shadow.

I think it was a dolphin which suddenly realized it didn't want to be that close to land, and hit the jets.
There is considerable overlap between the intelligence of the smartest bears and the dumbest tourists." - Yosemite Park Ranger

Rome


Diomedes

Nevermind the occasional massive explosion, everything is under control, Nuclear power is safe.
There is considerable overlap between the intelligence of the smartest bears and the dumbest tourists." - Yosemite Park Ranger

PhillyPhreak54

QB and MMH help raise the IQ level around here. Without them we'd be in trouble.

Eagaholic

Quote from: QB Eagles on March 14, 2011, 01:03:27 AM
Quote from: Eagaholic on March 13, 2011, 06:56:52 PM
QuoteNotice that when things do go wrong, like in Three Mile Island or in this Japanese situation.... no one actually dies
You are basing this assumption on what, exactly?

TMI has been well-studied. Based on a conservative assumption about the (still not well understood) health effects of very low-dose radiation, there could be one excess cancer death worldwide as a result of what happened there. The Japanese situation could still change, but given what I know about how the plants operate, what I know about what has happened to the plants, and the expertise of the Japanese nuclear community, I'd be very surprised if this turned into something that affected the public (other than the lost electricity). I have a masters degree in nuclear engineering and have been working exclusively on reactor protection for over five years now, so I have some understanding of what is happening in those plants. I am not interested in being a shill for any industry though... my motivation is to help other people understand what is going on, and I'd do the same if what was going on was a lot worse. This is a condition that is literally getting better by the hour as the most radioactive parts of the core decay into safer isotopes. Remember that these cores have been shut down since the earthquake.

There were some people who died at the plants, not because of any accident or nuclear event, but because they got hit by a farging tsunami. It's actually pretty damn impressive the condition the plant is in, while they are stacking bodies like cord wood right down the street. In fact, if they had to, they might have been able to keep the plant running were it not for the loss of external grid power (due to washed away power lines), which powers the plant's pumps. There are probably some very heroic individuals who have been working at the power station these last few days.

QuoteBut this ignores the potential damage of a failed coal plant vs the catastrophic consequences of a nuclear meltdown, which is like comparing a space shuttle to a spitball. Btw, the pollution caused by even a dirty coal plant at any given time will be cleared from the atmosphere within months. The half life of uranium-235 is 700 million years (meaning that if a kilo of U-235 is washed out into the environment, dispersed into the atmosphere etc., in 700 million years there will still be a half a kilogram left of radioactive U-235. A least it's not like U-238, which has a half life of 4.5 billion years. That would be a bummer of an accident.

You have it exactly backwards. Long half-lives mean that the substance is much less radioactive (as in, it takes much longer to decay because it releases fewer radioactive particles). Uranium is quite safe for anything other than ingestion. You can safely hold it and you probably have a lot more of it around you than you think. It becomes much more dangerous when it decays into radon, which has a half-life on the order of a few days, and which is an imperceptible gas that you can breathe in.

The most problematic isotopes in nuclear accidents (or bombs) are cesium-137 and strontium-90. They both have half lives around 30 years. That's long enough to hang around, but short enough to still be intensely radioactive. And biologically, both elements get taken up into the body and kept there. But even with this nasty stuff, low doses are okay.

You may have heard about some venting of radioactive gas. That stuff is from the coolant and isn't so bad, especially when dispersed in the atmosphere. The meltdown potential is more serious because that's how things like cesium and strontium break out of the fuel rods. But right now, these reactor cores still have shielding and containment around them. They aren't throwing that shtein all over the area like Chernobyl did.

TMI has been studied but the results have been controversial and mixed. However, it doesn't matter. The fact is there could have been catastrophic results even if there wasn't and we should consider ourselves lucky. And there could be in the future, whether by natural disaster, acts of terrorism, war, human error, mechanical failure or whatever. In the end, risk versus benefit must be the bottom line and nothing in the energy industry poses greater potential risk than nuclear power. As Dio had mentioned, wind, solar, wave,  2nd and 3rd generation sustainable and renewable sources and such need to be as heavily invested in as the nuclear, coal and oil industries. Even now in Japan, they are trying to prevent meltdowns in all 3 reactors. Again, we should consider it lucky if a major nuclear disaster is averted rather than an Andy Reidesque 'we'll be fine there.' This is where common sense trumps science.



QB Eagles

This third explosion may be trouble; its origin seems different than the first two, which were simple hydrogen explosions. Waiting for more info.

Rome

It seems pretty clear that they're losing control.  The farging genie is out of the bottle and they can't get it back in.  Wonderful.

MMH

Well with any luck the death cloud won't reach the US.  Or at least it will reach the Palin's first.