You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #107: I stick by my opinion. Backups to backups, which themselves are... [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
TheMadMonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-29-10 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #106
107. I stick by my opinion. Backups to backups, which themselves are...
...backups to backups IS excessive. AND IS asking for trouble and failures. Failures of the sort you love to post about, in the alarming format: "The last ditch cooling pump failed yesterday." while failing to acknowledge that the three pumps it was "covering" were performing flawlessly.

Too many redundant systems results in problems like the tritium leaks from lost/forgotten pipework in Vermont.

If by inadequate, you mean fails to cover every single possible imaginable scenario, then that argument can of course always be made. If however, you mean there are credible and appreciably likely high risk failure modes not adequately addressed, then I say you are wrong.

Even the most inherently unsafe designs (uncontained, graphite moderated piles) perform reasonably adequately UNLESS a deliberate effort is made to cause the reactor to fail.

More recent designs accept the possibility of a runaway reactor core and arrange to have it "Deconstruct" itself in a controlled and fully contained manner. Much more simple safety systems and operational protocols for day to day operation and specially designed in "weak points" that cause the reactor core to come apart safely in the event that all control is ever lost.

"Always have fatal flaws" Now that's a massive overgeneralisation. A fatal flaw in my lexicon would be one caused by an incorect understanding of the science involved. AFAIK the vast majority of what you refer to as "flaws" are far better characterised as engineering hurdles. We know what's required and we know that it is physically possible to achieve those requirements. It's the how (to do it cheaply enough) that eludes us.

Yes. I do expect you to allow me the luxury of future developments. The same demand is made often enough on behalf of solar cells, batteries, and other green technologies and I reasonably allow them. The basic shape of development is discipline independant. Just as you can point to a curve graphing the improvement of photovoltaic devices, I can apply a similar curve to the known sciences of transmutation, glassification and isotopic separation and project: that it will be possible to transmute longlived waste; that shortlived waste can be adequately sequestered away from the environment until it no longer presents a danger.

A cycle of objection, delays, shifting goalposts and ever increasing costs seems like a reasonable enough explanation for the abandoned projects. You speak of government support as if it were coming from all corners and not the true situation that sees different levels of government and different govt. departments at complete cross purposes. A local authority legislates for a recent improvement to a safety system and the whole project stalls while the "modified" design in reapproved.

And what else is new? They just want what the banks got. Free money.

Offer them their 100 billion dollars of immediate accident coverage at an ongoing cost of y percent of revenue per annum. Make the fine for non payment one (1) operational nuclear power plant. Reward low incident rates with lower premiums. Offer them exactly what they ask for, simply insist they pay a fair market price.

If we were able to abandon pressurised light water reactors in favour of "inherrently safe" designs, worst case scenarios contaminate only the reactor site itself. There is no need to provide Chernobyl level coverage if such incidents can't occur. Cleanup costs also would be within the industry's financial reach.

I'm not saying I or nuclear power have all the answers. I'm saying the questions aren't unanswerable. And I'm saying that if properly tamed and with a properly managed waste stream, nuclear power (as part of a larger hyrid system) ticks the largest number of boxes when it comes to meeting the baseload needs for a post greenhouse world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
  -A challenge for the nuclear "environmentalists" frequenting DU EE kristopher  Oct-18-10 01:08 PM   #0 
  - Imagine that, crickets...  kristopher   Oct-18-10 03:03 PM   #1 
  - Why should anyone answer your questions when you'll never accept the answers?  TheWraith   Oct-28-10 06:11 PM   #105 
  - I will answer your three questions...  Nederland   Oct-18-10 03:09 PM   #2 
  - The challenge is there, reply or not.  kristopher   Oct-18-10 03:12 PM   #3 
  - Right back at you  Nederland   Oct-18-10 03:26 PM   #4 
     - Don't be silly. He debates only straw men. N/t  FBaggins   Oct-18-10 06:23 PM   #20 
  - Although I haven't seen your questions...  Dead_Parrot   Oct-18-10 03:28 PM   #5 
  - An interesting thread of straw running through these...  Dead_Parrot   Oct-18-10 03:40 PM   #6 
  - It is the NUCLEAR INDUSTRY making the claim, ask them why they are promoting the lie.  kristopher   Oct-18-10 03:44 PM   #7 
     - Yet you refuse to look at world prices, only US ones.  Dead_Parrot   Oct-18-10 03:46 PM   #8 
        - Please don't ask Kristopher any questions  Nederland   Oct-18-10 03:51 PM   #9 
        - That's how lie detectors work.  DrGregory   Oct-19-10 10:57 PM   #61 
        - I asked about turnkey plants; any examples anywhere are acceptable for discussion.  kristopher   Oct-18-10 03:52 PM   #11 
           - Exactly  Dead_Parrot   Oct-18-10 04:01 PM   #12 
           - Are you saying that turnkey projects are a *bad* way to build a nuke plant?  kristopher   Oct-18-10 04:13 PM   #14 
              - Kris, I gave an answer in post 6  Dead_Parrot   Oct-18-10 04:24 PM   #15 
                 - The question was specific and you haven't addressed it at all.  kristopher   Oct-18-10 04:34 PM   #16 
                    - That's not using your big boy words, Kris.  Dead_Parrot   Oct-18-10 04:42 PM   #17 
                    - I'll make the question easier...  Dead_Parrot   Oct-18-10 05:03 PM   #18 
                       - Another transparent attempt to divert from the question  kristopher   Oct-18-10 06:34 PM   #21 
                          - Hmm. Since you are not actually answering...  Dead_Parrot   Oct-18-10 09:01 PM   #28 
                    - It's no guarantee.  DrGregory   Oct-19-10 11:00 PM   #62 
           - Have you noticed all the bullshit you've gotten so far  madokie   Oct-18-10 06:44 PM   #22 
           - Hey, I did  Dead_Parrot   Oct-18-10 09:53 PM   #29 
              - Why are you so afraid of basic facts related to making an informed energy choice?  kristopher   Oct-18-10 10:08 PM   #30 
                 - On the contrary, I like facts  Dead_Parrot   Oct-18-10 10:18 PM   #31 
                    - Why are nuclear power plants unable to be built under turnkey contracts?  kristopher   Oct-18-10 10:53 PM   #35 
                       - I'll repeat the answer for the third time:  Dead_Parrot   Oct-18-10 11:02 PM   #36 
                          - That is an evasion, not an answer.  kristopher   Oct-18-10 11:39 PM   #39 
                             - It's just not an answer you like.  Dead_Parrot   Oct-19-10 12:35 AM   #44 
           - The "Big Dig" in Boston was Turn Key  One_Life_To_Give   Oct-19-10 08:36 AM   #48 
              - Would you like to attempt to actually answer the questions...  kristopher   Oct-19-10 10:22 AM   #49 
                 - Fishing for a particular answer?  One_Life_To_Give   Oct-19-10 04:56 PM   #54 
                    - Paticular only in that I'm asking specifically about nuclear power and the problems unique to it...  kristopher   Oct-19-10 08:55 PM   #58 
                       - Market Forces would be nice.  DrGregory   Oct-22-10 12:45 AM   #79 
  - Why do you think that people who are educated about nuclear science owe anti-nukes anything.  NNadir   Oct-18-10 03:52 PM   #10 
  - "you have no shame"  kristopher   Oct-18-10 04:05 PM   #13 
  - Answer me this,  madokie   Oct-18-10 06:45 PM   #23 
  - my bad wrong place  madokie   Oct-18-10 07:56 PM   #24 
  - Because..  DrGregory   Oct-18-10 10:44 PM   #34 
     - So far I haven't read an explanation you've given that was coherent yet  madokie   Oct-19-10 08:15 PM   #57 
        - Same explanation as Professor Muller.  DrGregory   Oct-22-10 12:11 AM   #75 
           - The only thing obvious is your intent to misdirect attention and misinform the discussion.  kristopher   Oct-22-10 12:22 AM   #76 
              - Just because you don't understand them...  DrGregory   Oct-22-10 01:10 AM   #81 
                 - Let's let readers form their own conclusion  kristopher   Oct-22-10 01:41 PM   #86 
                    - Gee - I thought you would have learned something by now.  DrGregory   Oct-22-10 09:41 PM   #92 
                       - Thank you, I couldn't have asked for a better sample...  kristopher   Oct-22-10 10:09 PM   #93 
                          - BALONEY!  DrGregory   Oct-22-10 11:12 PM   #94 
  - In whose universe have I "no shame." I simply read the Vestas report. You obviously didn't.  NNadir   Oct-18-10 08:04 PM   #26 
     - Your wrote what you wrote, no one is spinning your words.  kristopher   Oct-18-10 08:31 PM   #27 
  - All knowing one how is it that we're supposed to learn  madokie   Oct-18-10 07:58 PM   #25 
  - The UNWILLING to learn..  DrGregory   Oct-19-10 11:12 PM   #63 
  - AMEN!!! Brother AMEN!!!  DrGregory   Oct-18-10 10:41 PM   #33 
  - I'll play  XemaSab   Oct-18-10 05:20 PM   #19 
  - "Shoreham Effect" has yet to be addressed...  DrGregory   Oct-18-10 10:38 PM   #32 
  - Nowhere in the world are nuclear plants built under turnkey contracts.  kristopher   Oct-18-10 11:03 PM   #37 
     - Why are turnkey contracts so important to you?  Nederland   Oct-18-10 11:35 PM   #38 
     - Turnkey contracts are merely the vehicle that exposes the economic failure of nuclear power.  kristopher   Oct-18-10 11:42 PM   #40 
        - Really?  Nederland   Oct-18-10 11:49 PM   #41 
           - There you go again taking an A and claiming it is a J.  kristopher   Oct-19-10 12:05 AM   #42 
           - I'm sorry  Nederland   Oct-19-10 12:12 AM   #43 
              - Statement 2 is entirely your creation and it is not possible to attribute it to anything I wrote  kristopher   Oct-19-10 01:46 AM   #45 
                 - Then correct the logic  caraher   Oct-19-10 07:05 AM   #46 
                 - If you *are* sincere, then provide a sincere response to the OP.  kristopher   Oct-19-10 08:35 AM   #47 
                    - The answer has already been in Post #32  Nederland   Oct-19-10 03:46 PM   #52 
                    - I wasn't being addressed in the OP  caraher   Oct-20-10 04:11 PM   #67 
                       - Patience is a virtue.  kristopher   Oct-20-10 04:30 PM   #68 
                       - And, strangely enough, you're still not being addressed, just dismissed ...  Nihil   Oct-21-10 05:01 AM   #72 
                 - Yes it is my creation  Nederland   Oct-19-10 03:16 PM   #50 
                    - An accurate description of why nuclear is not suitable for turnkey projects...  kristopher   Oct-19-10 03:29 PM   #51 
                       - No it does not  Nederland   Oct-19-10 04:01 PM   #53 
                          - Then why are you still afraid to engage on the questions asked?  kristopher   Oct-19-10 06:22 PM   #55 
                             - Stop.  GliderGuider   Oct-19-10 06:43 PM   #56 
                             - I know...  DrGregory   Oct-19-10 10:24 PM   #60 
                             - I'm not afraid, it's just pointless  Nederland   Oct-20-10 01:05 AM   #64 
                                - Deleted message  Name removed   Oct-20-10 08:34 AM   #66 
                                - You are most definitely very afraid to engage on wubstance.  kristopher   Oct-21-10 01:35 AM   #69 
                                   - Right back at you  Nederland   Oct-21-10 02:04 AM   #70 
                                      - No, it isn't "right back at you"; it is an evasion.  kristopher   Oct-21-10 02:36 AM   #71 
                                         - Right back at you  Nederland   Oct-21-10 09:49 AM   #74 
                                            - puppy dog?  DrGregory   Oct-22-10 12:38 AM   #78 
           - Only nuclear power  Confusious   Oct-22-10 02:12 AM   #82 
     - What reality distortion field are you living in?  DrGregory   Oct-19-10 10:22 PM   #59 
     - False Bullshit Sourced Directly to the Nuclear Power Tentacle of the MIC  kristopher   Oct-20-10 08:31 AM   #65 
        - Woohoo ... bonus points for the Hentai reference! (n/t)  Nihil   Oct-21-10 05:09 AM   #73 
        - Tommy "One Note" strikes again.  DrGregory   Oct-22-10 12:30 AM   #77 
        - CTRL-V for VICTORY! nt  Confusious   Oct-22-10 02:16 AM   #83 
        - Tommy "One Note" strikes again.  DrGregory   Oct-22-10 01:04 AM   #80 
     - The anti-nukes explained  txlibdem   Oct-28-10 03:05 AM   #100 
  - In the last 45 years  GliderGuider   Oct-22-10 07:28 AM   #84 
  - In the future the use of nuclear power is counterproductive...  kristopher   Oct-22-10 12:07 PM   #85 
     - Could be, could be.  GliderGuider   Oct-22-10 02:06 PM   #87 
        - You are going to wring your own neck twisting around like that...  kristopher   Oct-22-10 02:17 PM   #88 
           - ???  GliderGuider   Oct-22-10 02:32 PM   #90 
              - Which is exactly what I said.  kristopher   Oct-22-10 03:08 PM   #91 
                 - Figures never lie...but...  DrGregory   Oct-22-10 11:25 PM   #95 
                 - Wrong. Nuclear provides 6%  Confusious   Oct-29-10 09:02 PM   #113 
                    - You must start checking your facts.  kristopher   Oct-29-10 09:35 PM   #115 
                       - Only to you.  Confusious   Oct-30-10 03:08 AM   #117 
                          - Are you denying heat losses in thermal systems or lack of same for renewables?  kristopher   Oct-30-10 02:26 PM   #122 
                             - No, you misunderstand, as usual  Confusious   Oct-30-10 03:59 PM   #124 
                                - Short and sweet, here are the numbers  kristopher   Oct-31-10 01:32 AM   #126 
                                   - would you happen to have a link backing up your assertion?  Confusious   Oct-31-10 02:07 AM   #128 
                                      - I used the numbers from YOUR links - the difference was I know knew to interpret them  kristopher   Oct-31-10 02:33 AM   #129 
                                         - My points are  Confusious   Oct-31-10 03:10 AM   #130 
                                         - One other point  Confusious   Oct-31-10 03:16 AM   #131 
                                         - Another point  Confusious   Oct-31-10 03:51 AM   #132 
  - The 3 questions are answered and implications are discusssed here  kristopher   Oct-22-10 02:32 PM   #89 
  - Kick.  kristopher   Oct-26-10 03:17 PM   #96 
  - Come on, the challenge is still out here waiting for you.  kristopher   Oct-27-10 10:14 PM   #97 
  - Right back at you  Nederland   Oct-28-10 12:39 AM   #98 
     - You ran from the questions, then you ran from the answers.  kristopher   Oct-28-10 01:32 AM   #99 
        - I don't want to run home, I want to engage you  Nederland   Oct-28-10 11:33 AM   #101 
           - Then engage. No one is stoping you but you.  kristopher   Oct-28-10 01:25 PM   #102 
              - Cool  Nederland   Oct-28-10 01:51 PM   #103 
  - First, let's address the words you put in our mouths as ABSOLUTES.  TheMadMonk   Oct-28-10 02:10 PM   #104 
     - Wow! It is difficult to imagine how you arrived at most of those conclusions...  kristopher   Oct-29-10 03:28 AM   #106 
        - I stick by my opinion. Backups to backups, which themselves are...  TheMadMonk   Oct-29-10 02:02 PM   #107 
           - So that is the view through the rose colored glasses of the nuclear industry...  kristopher   Oct-29-10 03:14 PM   #108 
              - Really?  Nederland   Oct-29-10 05:08 PM   #109 
              - Really?  kristopher   Oct-29-10 05:51 PM   #110 
                 - Here you go  Nederland   Oct-29-10 06:14 PM   #111 
                    - pwned  GliderGuider   Oct-29-10 08:25 PM   #112 
                    - That is an outstanding example.  kristopher   Oct-29-10 09:14 PM   #114 
                       - Chernobyl demonstrated that it takes a fully uncontained reactor...  TheMadMonk   Oct-30-10 01:54 AM   #116 
                       - Nice try Kristopher, but every knows you just got pwned  Nederland   Oct-30-10 09:40 AM   #119 
                          - The difference between legitimate discussion and harassment.  kristopher   Oct-30-10 01:35 PM   #120 
                             - "Harassment"? Really????  GliderGuider   Oct-30-10 03:48 PM   #123 
              - All pretty much explainable by mutiple agencies and lobbies working at...  TheMadMonk   Oct-30-10 04:16 AM   #118 
                 - That begs the question of why it isn't being done anywhere, doesn't it?  kristopher   Oct-30-10 02:18 PM   #121 
                    - And the US actively interfering at every turn.  TheMadMonk   Oct-30-10 11:40 PM   #125 
                       - Deleted message  Name removed   Oct-31-10 01:36 AM   #127 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC