Thread of nuclear fallout in California, USA

BobZemco

Well-known member
[...continuation from horary thread, discussion moved here - Moderator]

There are scientific reasons why the answer is "no" in addition to the horary.

A nominal-sized particle (about 48 microns -- the size of radioisotopes, their daughter products and fission fragments in a reactor) falls at a rate 2,000 feet per hour. That is the basis by which we plot fallout on a map from nuclear hazards. Wind-speed and direction are the other two factors, and they are not uniform in the atmosphere. That information is typically reported by meteorological services in millibar layers. The surface pressure, generally under 12,000 feet is 850 millibars. The jet stream is in the 300 millibar zone, at 32,000 feet.

In order for radioisotopes to get into the jet stream, they would either have to be thrust there by an intense explosion, or rise in a heat plume from a fire exposed to the air.

Neither of those scenarios are possible for a number of reasons. The cascading reaction that must occur within 6 nanoseconds to create a nuclear detonation (like a nuclear weapon) cannot occur in a nuclear reactor. It's a matter of physics. It isn't possible for 4.5 kg of plutonium or 30 kg of U-235 to come together to form a critical mass (and those are the minimum masses for a yield of 0.1 - 1.0 kt).

The other issues involve reactor design and operation. Comparisons with Chernobyl are nothing more than panic and media hype. Chernobyl used carbon-graphite rods as reaction control moderators. Carbon-graphite burns. The Japanese reactors use MOX fuel and because they do, they use a different type of moderator, so there is nothing in the reactor core to burn.

The Japanese reactors also have concrete steel-reinforced containment domes (internal and external). Chernobyl had none, so the explosion caused by a build-up of hydrogen gas immediately exposed the reactor core to the atmosphere, and the burning carbon-graphite control rods did the rest of the damage. At those temperatures, water is a super-heated steam, with the atoms in an excited state, and then there are x-rays, gammas, neutrons, electrons, nuclei and fission fragments zinging around and the break the bonds between the outer electrons and you have what is sort of a nuclear electrolysis effect that splits water molecules into free hydrogen and free oxygen. And hydrogen, well, you saw what happened to the Hindenburg airship when it docked at Lakehurst, New Jersey.

Sure, some fallout particles from Chernobyl reached Stockholm, but that's about 780 miles or so. It's 5,400 miles from Japan to California, and again, a nominal-sized particle falls at a rate of 2,000 feet per hour.

It's a matter of simple math. Even with wind-speed in the jet stream of 70 knots, it'll take 70+ hours to reach the West Coast, during which time, the particles will have fallen 140,000+ feet. With the jet stream at 32,000 feet, well, there you go.

If there's a bit of confusion, yes, when the US and others conducted high altitude nuclear weapons test detonations, the radioactive particles really did circle the globe for years, but when I say high altitude, I'm talking 30 miles to 60 miles above the Earth's surface. That is the stratosphere, not the troposphere. The troposphere ends around 12-15 miles. Atmospheric conditions in the stratosphere are very complex and turbulent and that is why particles can stay there longer (and that includes particles of ejecta from asteroid strikes or violent volcanic eruptions).
 
Last edited by a moderator:

tikana

Well-known member
Re: Threat of nuclear fall out here in CA?

Bob

yeah .. Chernobyl's plant was built on old already outdated nuclear technology because of the cost. I believe Andrei Sakharov, Soviet nuclear physicist, even back then warned of the problems and possible meltdown before the construction began... Plus dont forget that the walls of the concrete tube were thinned out since ppl were stealing the materials from the construction site. THEN there was a bigger problem, that project along many other had a time crunch so construction errors were present.
There is a dosier online it is like 200+ pages why Chernobyl plant failed.

Media even though may create all the hype but we do not have any other nuclear plant disaster to compare Japanese one to.
 

Ishwara

Active member
Re: Threat of nuclear fall out here in CA?

Thank you, Bob, for this truly informative and reassuring scientific perspective. I really appreciate it.
 

waybread

Well-known member
Re: Threat of nuclear fall out here in CA?

Ishwara, the danger isn't from the plants in Japan. But look at the power plants in California, and contact your elected representatives as well as environmental and industry lobbies to ensure their safety. Another issue is the whole hazards response to evacuation and emergency preparedness. If the power plant nearest you were in an earthquake or lost its electrical system, how prepared are your local jurisdictions to cope?

Another issue is that the Japanese fishing industry and agriculture in affected areas will be shut down for some time to come. I adore Japanese food, but I would think twice before buying Japanese products. Sad to say.
 

tikana

Well-known member
Re: Threat of nuclear fall out here in CA?

Waybread

Nonesense!

we have only 2 nuclear plants in california

One in Diablo Canyon - No earthquake faults anywhere near it
another one is in san diego right on the shore - we will never have a mega tsunami ---- San andreas fault runs farther inland towards hot springs and etc

we are 100% safe from the quake infused meltdowns

T
 

waybread

Well-known member
Re: Threat of nuclear fall out here in CA?

Tikana, here is a a run-down of nuclear power plants in California: www.energy.ca.gov/nuclear/california.htmlNote that radioactive concrete remains radiaoactive.

The attached map shows fault lines in California. Your two active plants are not on the San Andreas fault line, but are close to other fault lines. But note that any type of disaster that knocks out power on a long term basis is a threat to the older plants, regardless of the cause. We also have to ask why private insurers in the US have declined to insure nuclear power plants if they are as safe as the utility companies claim.
 

Attachments

  • California fault lines.gif
    California fault lines.gif
    10 KB · Views: 35

tikana

Well-known member
Re: Threat of nuclear fall out here in CA?

Waybread

they are not run down plants! They have been closed decommisioned. they dont produce any nuclear power... Nuclear waste? It is recycleable! France uses all recycled nuclear waste. Nuclear waste in Norway gets buried deep in the ocean ... there is enough of a nuclear waste north of santa clarita which is on the border with LA literally exposed. Hell why am i going that way.. There is a nuclear submarine sunk in off Azores islands. Peopel going diving in the area no one reporting any problems

When San Andreas moves, It will NOOOOOOT affect San Diego's nuclear plant hardly AT ALLLLL! It is the same thing as happend in Northridge. It seems like you didnt live through a big quake.. I have .. I can tell you i lived 10 min away from the epicenter. Yeah other regions felt it but it wasnt as big as it is in epicenter. We had 6.7 quake.. in santa monica ppl felt 3.5 or something.

San Diego nuclear plant was built in 83 - under new technology plus it was built to withstand 7.0 directly under the plant. The closest fault like is Castiano .. Castiano HAS BEEEN DEAD for 125,000 years!
dont believe me? here http://books.google.com/books?id=CX...EwADgK#v=onepage&q=Cristianitos fault&f=false

""""We also have to ask why private insurers in the US have declined to insure nuclear power plants if they are as safe as the utility companies claim. """"
EASY answer ... ANI is in charge of insuring all nuclear plants WORLDWIDE. Double insurance is attached! Why should the US insure the nuclear plants?!

calling representative???? WRONG agency! if anything call, UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION!!

i dont get it .. why do people create a panic where there is no need for it

Tik
 

waybread

Well-known member
Re: Threat of nuclear fall out here in CA?

Tikana, who is creating a panic? Not me. You obviously are a strong supporter of nuclear power and will find many experts who agree with you. I have reservations about nuclear power and will find experts who agree with me. So perhaps we have to agree to disagree.

You might want to look up the history of the Humboldt Bay nuclear power plant and why it was shut down.

One of the biggest problems of nuclear power plants is that they remain radioactive long after they are decomissioned, there is still no known safe site for disposal of radioactive waste--let alone transporting it to the disposal site (cf. Yucca Mountain) Re: the old Oyster Creek plant close to NYC, see: http://www.businessweeek.com/ap/financialnews/D9MOBOVGO.htm

Please keep in mind that disasters do not have to be caused by earthquakes or tsunamis. Anything that knocks out electrical power for a considerable period of time puts nuclear plants at risk.

Human error--and in some cases actual falsification of records--can also cause problems. According to a LA Times report of Mat 17, 2010 the NRC learned that the Diablo Canyon plant at San Luis Obispo had some safety systems disabled for a year and a half without repairs. The utility company's own safety checks failed to detect the problem. The Shoreline fault was detected after this plant was on-line. According to a letter sent yesterday by your state's senators to the chairman of the NRC this plant was not built to withstand quakes of a magnitude that the California Energy Commission now believes it could receive.

Something like 8 million people live within 50 miles of California's 2 operating nuclear power plants. If you live near one of them, have your public officials ever informed the public of an evacuation plan in the event of an emergency?

In terms of who insures a nuclear power plant in the US, see the Price-Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act. Essentially in the event of an emergency, the utility pays a kind of deductable, and after that the Federal government picks up the tab.

Anyway, I like your German flag, Tikana. I note that the conservative German government of Angela Merkel ordered the closure of Germany's oldest nuclear plants until their safety could be better guaranteed.
 

tikana

Well-known member
Re: Threat of nuclear fall out here in CA?

Waybread

Why is it that you read the news without thinking why things done the way they done?

Germany is decomissioning ALL nuclear plants that are dated to 1970s
THEY AGE! it is easier to build a new plant than fix it. Some of them You cant even fix nor prolong because they do not comply with current laws. Take a house for instance. YOU CANNOT build or put in the house anything that has lead in it. Ages ago lead was used in pipes, paint and etc. It was perfectly normal - not anymore! What happens if the house has lead paint? It gets sealed so it can pass the inspection. Same applies to the nuclear plants but here it is complicated you cant just shut the reactor like a lightswitch. LOL
so if the nuclear plant built which is later considered to have outdated regulations. If it cannot be fixed, it will get decomissioned.
you bring up Germany.
there is one built in Eastern Germany in 1956 - it has soviet reactor and its age. There is no room to build another nuclear plant. Germany is SMALL!
GERMANY WILL NOT build new nuclear plants because their goal is to rely on solar energy by 2050. They are phasing nuclear plants so they can provide the same ratio from nuclear to solar. THey have solar parks already. They got most advanced solar planels on face of the earth. I think they have 20 companies that were partially funded by german govt to develop solar panels. Most of them began developing solar energy late 1970s.
They are much happier jacking up prices from the govt of the countries that are incompetent in developing their own solar panels/energy than listening to tree huggers b*tch about nuclear plants. It seem like it is predominent crowd over there. I'd say kill coal burning plants and build new nuclear plants with solar panels, everyone will be happy except treehuggers. Eastern germany nuclear plants have 2 problems - they pretty much all of them have soviet reactors and they are OLD!!!!!!
I want panels cause i do not approve / never have on coal burning energy and i want to live offgrid. Hydros / nuclear / wind / solar / nuclear - all good on my list
Humboldt plant? have you actually read the reasons why it was shut down? BECAUSE seismologists found newly previously undetected fault lines AGAIN this plant was build back in 70s.
Moving on.... the US HAS had evacuation plans just in case of leak or a meltdown. We dont live in 3rd world country fyi as much as the world wants to make the US as 3rd world country.i dont live near the nuclear plant but i live near nuclear waste site. There are a few countries that have nuclear plants on the table. I love this one... France is planning to build a nuclear plant under the water in the ocean. Chinas has a few nuclear plants on the table.. they are stalled atm cause of the japan's quake and China is not alien to quakes.

i would be more paranoid someone letting go thousands of flesh eating bacteria out of vials than nuclear meltdown

long live nuclear power
 

dr. farr

Well-known member
Re: Threat of nuclear fall out here in CA?

Of course I am "NO NUKES!" Farr:bandit:, but then again I have a lot of peculiar and non-politically correct ideas-like homeopathy, and herbalism, and ASTROLOGY :pinched:! (but of course my approach to astrology also is, mostly, unconventional and not "politically correct" either :andy:!)

I do believe that the media is hyping up the current situation regarding the nuclear power plants in Japan, I don't think it will be a major disaster-but it could have been, and one day, such a disaster might occur. In the final analysis it all depends upon the Cosmos and its trend of influences, which we try to read in our astrological art and science, as best we can.
 
Last edited:

tikana

Well-known member
Re: Threat of nuclear fall out here in CA?

hey Farr

Call your power company and ask how much of your energy comes from nuclear power plants? Then protest it!

No Nukes? Call IRS and find out how much of the money you are paying in taxes goes to nuclear warheads! Protest / Contest that as well

Wake me up when the planet will heat up to +3 deg celcius

happy nuking!
 

dhundhun

Well-known member
Re: Threat of nuclear fall out here in CA?

Radiation plume likely to reach California today

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...each-California-today/articleshow/7732856.cms

But it will reach every part of world and be too diluted to cause any significant effect.

It can cause minor problems to highly sensitive people - Like I am told by my physician no further radiation for few months. I might be sensitive to radiation due to couple of recent radiological exams. When dentist wanted X-Ray, I told my dentist no to x-ray now. Likewise few people may be sensitive.

FYI, Miso Soup is very helpful against radiation.

Some excerpts from link:

"Health and nuclear experts emphasize that radiation in the plume will be diluted as it travels and, at worst, would have extremely minor health consequences in the United States, even if hints of it are ultimately detectable."

===
Coming to horary question, the answer is NO.

===
And here is radiation MAP:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/03/16/science/plume-graphic.html
frames-47.png
 
Last edited:

dr. farr

Well-known member
Re: Threat of nuclear fall out here in CA?

hey Farr

Call your power company and ask how much of your energy comes from nuclear power plants? Then protest it!

No Nukes? Call IRS and find out how much of the money you are paying in taxes goes to nuclear warheads! Protest / Contest that as well

Wake me up when the planet will heat up to +3 deg celcius

happy nuking!


I thought you call me "Cowboy Farr":smile:!

Already (years ago) filed protest with the Power Company (I use certain unique alternative power sources, so my average electric bill is about $8 per month:surprised:) Already (years ago) filed several protests with a couple of US government agencies relative to nuclear missiles (LOT of good that did, however I felt good about doing so anyway!)

...but this is a political issue, and I respect all informed opinions (like Tikana's) even if they disagree with my own insight...

Also, thanks to Mr Zemco and dhundhun for their informative postings in this thread.

In answer to the OP's question about what (in my OPINION) would be the radiation significator among the 7 (traditional) planets, no question (in my mind) that it would be Saturn: that planet is affinitive to the heaviness of nuclear materials (at the atomic level), and also to the "cold burns" radiation produces (at less than melting/igniting heat levels), and to the chronic (very long term) pathogenic effects radiation has on living organisms, and also to the mutagenic effect of radiation (even at relatively low concentration/rad levels): all of these are similar to Saturnine qualities.
 
Last edited:

waybread

Well-known member
Re: Threat of nuclear fall out here in CA?

Tikana, we should all be reluctant to hijack a thread, but hopefully Ishwara has received the desired answer and is OK with this discussion. So just a few more points.

1. You do not need to reduce your arguments to personal insults against me or anyone else who simply disagrees with your opinions. I think plenty about environmental issues such as nuclear power. Calling people "tree huggers" is a red herring.

2. The ageing of nuclear power plants is precisely one of their problems. Most of the US nuclear power plants are older due to the post-Three Mile Island moratorium on new plant construction. Unlike lead paint in an old house, however, the problems attendant on ageing nuclear power plants can affect millions of people. Radioactive concrete from a decomissioned plant is not going to become safe any time soon. Welds in ageing pipes are of particular concern. Once fuel rods are spent and once a plant is decommissioned, safe disposal of nuclear wastes is a problem. With our present level of technology it cannot all be recycled. Long term storage is one issue, and the site near you (I don't know where you live) may be described as only temporary. At the Hanford nuclear site in Washington, a lot of buried nuclear waste is simply unaccounted for. Transportation through settled areas to reach the storage site is another.

One of the problems in Japan is the storage of spent fuel rods on-site at the facility, which is the case for many US plants today.

3. Germany is actually putting a lot of emphasis on wind generation. Their alternative energy breakdown is currently about 2% solar and 7% wind, notably along the North Sea. My German relatives initially were very sceptical about wind energy, saying that it was not economical but was a politicized concession to the Green Party. They may feel differently now.

4. The decomissioning of the Humboldt plant due to a newly discovered fault line is precisely the problem. Geologists occasionally discover new fault lines. Consequently plants may be built to withstand earthquake and tsunami intensities less severe than the ones that scientists later decide they could receive.

5. The need for any kind of new power plants would be dramatically reduced by eliminating the sheer waste in the energy we consume. We would save money into the bargain by not paying for energy that does not do the work for which it was intended.

6. I don't know if you listen to NPR, Tikana, but the issue of China's nuclear power plant construction program was just on Morning Edition. One of the problems with nuclear power in China--as elsewhere--is government corruption at all levels. Thus the safeguards that should be built into the physical plants and into the human factor of their operation may not be there.

One thing you cannot wish away or legislate away is human error and human corruption. My philosophy in life is that if the chances of something going wrong are small but the consequences of something going wrong are huge, you manage for the risk regardless. Unfortunately you cannot manage adequately for the human factor.

7. I seriously doubt that the 8 million people living near California's nuclear plants are aware of any evacuation plans.
 

tikana

Well-known member
Re: Threat of nuclear fall out here in CA?

Waybread


I am not insulting you personally i dont really care what you agree or disagree on. I think you are a bit of a sensationalist but whatever. Nuclear plants are not going anywhere. You can kick and scream all you want. Facts are there are more deaths involving hydroelectric plants and coal mining accidents and enviroment disasters than from nuclear. We only have 1 major disaster involving a nuclear plant and Japan is second still not a full meltdown. Treehuggers, YES THEM!, b*tch about global warming all the time yet do nothing to help enviroment. Look around your house and tell me how much stuff in your house is made in China or any other country? Do you have solar or thermal energy installed ??? To bring that stuff in, it has to be shipped by a ship. Ships need to be fueled. We are still relying on FOSSIL burning fuel more than anything else. Want to save earth? No need for 50+ inch TV esp Plasma which eats electricity like a thirsty elephant, weatherproof house with sheep wool not synthetic stuff which uses oil, install local drywall, change windows or seal the existent windows, no need to live in a mansion (bigger house is bigger bills are), Tall ceilings as cook as they look elegant but maan it takes forever to warm the house up.

Changing the planet STARTS at home. You can get solar panels that will keep the house warm and with lights up to 247 and it is renewable and no hassle no bills

Are you aware that living in the US and if you have solar panels installed, the power company pays you money if you outsource unused solar energy? We have kits here for sale llittle solar panels on a go that can fireup your cell phone .. laptop.. flash light .. desk lamp *from Ikea*
so if you are on vacation and your house has solar panels by the time you get back you get a check!


Why are you bringing up only nuclear plants?

Let talk about hydroelectric plants.

1999 - Russia hydroelectric plant accident leaves 76 workers dead!
Hydroelectric plants destroy ecosystem and loss of land.
Where are the treehuggers in those cases? - politically not correct.
Everytime there is a hydroelectric plant plan gets put into a place - people get moved

DAM FAIL! Look up Dams failures and lot of them are attached to hydroelectric plants.

OHH LOOOK!!!!!!!!!! "The Banqiao Dam failure in Southern China directly resulted in the deaths of 26,000 people, and another 145,000 from epidemics. Millions were left homeless. Also, the creation of a dam in a geologically inappropriate location may cause disasters such as 1963 disaster at Vajont Dam in Italy, where almost 2000 people died."
read this
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/apr/22/lamar-alexander/facts-risks-nuclear-power-plants/

you dont read, do you?

USA is #1 in wind farming onshore ...
UK and Denmark are #1 head to head on offshore windfarming
Installing offshore turbines in pacific ocean is a waste of time and money cause we have little to no storms out here. Atlantic has too many hurricanes which will damage the turbines so no point installing them there ether.
Germany comes 3rd in wind onshore turbines after the US and China.

The US hasnt built 1 single nuclear plant in over 30 years or so. BUUUT to your shock, we might end up having nuclear powered cars. The idea is resurfacing since nuclear age of the 50s. One car type particularly has been more discussed than others - cars on nuclear-fueled hydrogen. I am sure you are already cringing in terror. http://www.switch2hydrogen.com/ ,,, dont worry if we have no new nuclear plants, we will have nuclear fueled cars!

you are bringing up corruption in china... CORRUPTION is everywhere not only in china. I would be more concerned about Iran's nuclear than China's. We have sattilites that are cirling around 247 that can spot any radiation if something happens. I think that is how Chernobyl's radiation was spotted.

so according to your logic, lets all kill all the plants nuclear and fossil and go back to caves and rub 2 rocks. Ohh but then ehhh some idiot triggers a massive brush fire.. I bet ya you will come out swinging with "lets kil that too!" right?

NOTHING IS 100% FAULT PROOF NOTHING!

You seriousy do not understand californians cause you never lived here. We have 12 million people in LA ALONE!!!!!!!!!!!! I am excluding tourists! I run into a few tourists right after 94 quake. It was interesting to hear what they said... i guarantee you 95% of the locals are not ready for a quake. 1994 quake proved that. No water, no food NOTHING. yet early in the morning all stores were emptied out not only grocery stores but applances stores as well. What makes you think people know what to do during the meltdown if if ever comes? Forget california.. ask anyone DO YOU KNOW what to do if there is a nuclear meltdown? look at the Sumatra quake .. anyone who actually sat through geography class would know that if WATER receeds for some unknown reason with such speed, RUN! Tsunami is coming. "What did people do? Stood around .. ohh look lil' fishes!!! lets go catch!" the same type of freaking morons as last week.. Police said DO NOT come to the shore of the pacific AT ALL!!!!!!!!!!!!.. no, dumbazzes showed up in hordes. a few tried to go into waters. Cops should have let them go in. If surfers / swimmers drowned, there was a warning .. they didnt listen .. ***** them!

NPR? No i dont. You can listen to ppl's opinions 247. MSNBC was just talking to a mayor of SF about 2 nuclear plants. he def had interesting input. He was not keen on fault lines and nuclear plant but then if he has been around in 1980s as a mayor i am pretty sure he would have an opposite opinion.

we are killing ourselves as is ... nuclear meltdown or not .. at the end it is all ending.

:alien:
 

waybread

Well-known member
Re: Threat of nuclear fall out here in CA?

Tikana, being beligerent doesn't make it your case. Neither does your Straw Man debating tactic. (For anyone unfamiliar with it, it consists of setting up a false argument for one's opponent--the "straw man"--who is then much easier to demolish than the real ideas which the opponent actuall holds.) Tikana, if my ideas were as silly as the ones you imagine for me, I wouldn't care for them, either.

Public health and plant safety are extremely important concerns, regardless of the energy source. You haven't made an argument for nuclear power with your examples. You have made an argument about the need to prevent badly managed projects.

Define tree-huggers. Environmentalists (if they are whom you mean) come in all varieties and do not share identical views. But a simple perusal of environmental history would show you many examples of how you personally benefit from their work. If you live in an area of CA affected by smog, for example, thank them that it is not significantly worse. If you want to live off-grid as you claim, you are at least partly a "tree-hugger" in my book.

I live in a part of western Canada where our electricity comes from hydroelectric dams. They have environmental costs and the world has pretty much run out of new developable sites. However, it is not a source that dumps radiation or fossil fuel waste products into the air. If people wasted less of the energy that electricity-generating sources produce, probably we wouldn't need more power plants.

My husband and I keep our thermostat in winter considerably lower than most people feel comfortable with. Rather than spending money on new technologies, we prefer the older ones: put on a sweater, and it you are still cold, wear thermal underwear. We have a newer efficient furnace. If we use our air conditioning 3 times during the summer, that's a lot. Rather, we manage our heat flow by opening windows at night and shutting up the house during the day. We have some passive solar cooling thanks to trees planted on the west side of our house. When they mature, we will have more.

We own one very small TV. Most of our furniture is used furniture or local antiques, so it was not made in China. We own one vehicle and when we drive to town we bundle our errands and activities to limit our trips. We do not let the engine idle if it is avoidable. We use very few disposables: for example, I don't buy paper towels and seldom use other paper products or buy products with excessive packaging. (All this takes energy to produce.) We compost everything we can. Since I do a lot of home-canning, I reuse all my Mason jars. I have a large organic vegetable garden and we grow most of our own vegetables and much of our fruit. Much of the rest we buy from local growers at their orchards or in our farmers' market. The beef in my freezer was locally grown and I know the farmers who raised it. I buy eggs from a 9-year old on my road. I am active in the local food movement in my valley, and I am able to buy local CSA grain which I grind into flour at home. I bake my own bread.

While my carbon footprint is still on a North American scale, it shows what each person can do with a personal commitment to our beautiful and beleaguered planet.

It is fine for you to feel strongly about your beliefs, but it is best not to imagine things about others with whom you are not acquainted.
 
Last edited:

rahu

Banned
Re: Threat of nuclear fall out here in CA?

i just read today 3/18 that radiation has already been detected at the u c berkley.a professor set up detectors and has found a mulitude of radioactice particles from japan.
rahu
 

tikana

Well-known member
Re: Threat of nuclear fall out here in CA?

Waybread

" But look at the power plants in California, and contact your elected representatives as well as environmental and industry lobbies to ensure their safety. Another issue is the whole hazards response to evacuation and emergency preparedness. If the power plant nearest you were in an earthquake or lost its electrical system, how prepared are your local jurisdictions to cope?"

Here is my answer to you

House of Reps / Congress are NOT responsible for our nuclear plants

These guys are!
http://www.hss.energy.gov/nuclearsafety/
The Office of Nuclear Safety, Quality Assurance, and Environment is a branch of the Office of Health, Safety, and Security. This agency regulates the nuclear power industry within the United States. The agency's mission is to establish and maintain requirements and expectations while protecting workers, the public, and the environment from nuclear operations.

Insurance is covered by ANI - already told you that


WE ARE READY for nuclear power plant's problems!

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/mar/16/us-nuclear-plants-located-near-geologic-faults/

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/mar/14/utilities-calif-nuclear-plants-can-handle-quakes/

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/mar/11/san-onofre-nuclear-plant-tsunami-ready/


There is nothing for me to prove you on safety of OUR CALIFORNIAN built plants NONE! we dont have a problem! wake me up when we do.

what do you propose? Shutting them down? Really? NO ONE will let you do that!


why do you even bother with out nuclear plants? Go complain to Ontario's governor - they are about to start building another nuclear plant
Yeah .. 50% of all Ontario's energy is generated through nuclear plants.
15% of all canadian energy is produced by nuclear plant. so YEAH YOU ARE using nuclear energy. You are not only living off hydroelectric... the rest is predominatly COAL COAL COAL! Call your electric company and ask them to give you a break down. You'd be very surprized.

you mentioned smog in LA.. DEPENDS where you are at .. ppl who live in deep in the city - you have smog... Downtown has smog... near the ocean you wont see any! If you are in the valley like in San Fernando - you have no choice but to deal with smog because it is on the bottom of the valley surrounded by mountains .. smog has nowhere to escape... Desert - you have no smog and it is 4000 feet above the water. They get snow and blazing summers.

NO, I AM NOT A TREEHUGGER... thank you very much. I HATE COAL! Not keen on hydroelectrics either. Nuclear plants - yeah as long as they are built up to the code... living off the grid ----- you dont think, do you?
What happens when earthquake hits? ohh wait, you never lived through 1. All electricity/gas get shut down to avoid fires! This lasts for HOURS!!!!!! Water gets shut off too because pipes break under the ground. it is pure survival plus it increases value to the house up to 75 to 100%.. i will have energy though the night then recharge during the day .. if i am lucky enough i might end up having my own well. Getting a permit into drilling is a pain in the rear end ...that will get rid of all the problems with no water. My def of retarded treehuggers is people like AL GORE.. who yell and scream Global warming this and that yet their electricity bill is astronomical! some hollyweirdos who went out and bought prius yet living in 10 bed house for 2 - 3 people - imagine their electricity bill. 2-3 day concert on green planet yet ton of garbage of plastic was taken after the festival! NICEEEEE!


If there is a disaster, as in 94 quake .. we will take care ourselves because we are one of the two states (TExas) who can survive without the other 49 states. If there is a tsunami, bring it on!!!

by the way i found the answer you have been seeking on insurance on nuclear plants

There is a Federal Law called the Price-Anderson Act which pretty much says that that any liability for damages above $10 billion for a nuclear accident on the Federal Government. The first $10 billion is covered by a fund maintain by the nuclear industry which is covered by ANI.

There you have it!
 
Last edited:

tikana

Well-known member
Re: Threat of nuclear fall out here in CA?

i just read today 3/18 that radiation has already been detected at the u c berkley.a professor set up detectors and has found a mulitude of radioactice particles from japan.
rahu


yeah i know .. i am getting the same info from SF university

now, they are talking about shutting the nuclear plant like in Chernobyl sealing it in concrete dome. That is the very last resort.

Ohh good news .. they are trying to stretch the power cords to restart the power. Within 3 hours we should find out what is going on. Once they restore the power it will be easier to do system restore.

i am suprized that american nuclear engeneers are not on the site.
 

waybread

Well-known member
Re: Threat of nuclear fall out here in CA?

Tikana, there is no point in trying to reason with you any further. One of my father's sayings seems relevant to your aggressive style. "Don't confuse me with the facts: my mind is made up."

Respond to this post, and you will indeed get the last word.

Later, W.
 
Top