Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

NNadir

(33,512 posts)
6. In general, cults like to call other more reputable groups...
Wed Jun 20, 2012, 03:53 PM
Jun 2012

...(as in Nobel Laureate quality people) "cults."

Dr. Alvin Weinberg wrote the first Nuclear Engineering text with Eugene Wigner in 1956, at the dawn of the First Nuclear Era.

He was head of the Oak Ridge Laboratory and counted among his friends and associates, the Nobel Laureate Glenn Seaborg.

There is a famous photograph of Dr. Weinberg with the President of the United States during his tenure, Jack and Jackie Kennedy in the control room of the research reactor at Oak Ridge, accompanied by a guy named Al Gore, father to the 2000 Democratic nominee.

Mr. Gore, Mr. Kennedy, Mrs. Kennedy and Dr. Weinberg

Unremarked by the anti-nuke cult, is the fact that Eugene Wigner won the Nobel Prize in Physics.

It's unsurprising to hear the anti-nuke cults talking about alleged "nuclear cults."

This reminds me of my fundementalist sister in law, who says that Catholicism is a cult.

She believes the world was created in six days...

Well then...

As for the "nuclear priesthood," it's rather unnecessary. Nuclear energy is a mature technology and it utilized broadly around the world. It's strengths are well known, and despite much caviling by hysterics, it was recently shown that it was safer to be in a damaged nuclear powerplant - where no one died - than in any other kind of structure - where more than ten thousand people died - in a 9.0 earthquake and 15 meter tsunami.

All the name calling - and other chanting - by all the mindless anti-nukes as the rail against the world's largest, by far, source of climate change gas free energy will not change the common sense of the people of the world who are building 60 nuclear reactors.

World Reactors Under Construction

There's no mysticism involved in this construction, just hard engineering.

The new reactors are like adding another nuclear France. The reactors now being constructed will produce about 1.8 exajoules of pure electricity, and about 5 exajoules of primary energy.

Meanwhile they still talking in the so called "renewable cults" about getting that first exajoule, out of 520 exajoules used each year by humanity, in their expensive and wasteful solar toys. This talk's been going on for 50 years, with no important result.

So what, in fact, is "faith based" here?

In the last ten years, the concentration of dangerous fossil fuel waste - waste that kills 3.3 million people per year according to the World Health Organization - has risen from 373 ppm to 397 ppm, while the whole time the sun power and wind power cults in this space have railed against the world's largest, by far, source of climate change gas free primary energy.

Mauna Loa CO2 data, May 2012

Heckuva job, anti-nukes. You must be very proud.

It’s an elitist, war-mongering, closed society of inbred, inwardly-thinking, aggressively xenophobic Kolesar Jun 2012 #1
I cross my fingers for the day people stop using the word nuclear in that manner FogerRox Jun 2012 #2
Stop using the word "nuclear" in what manner? kristopher Jun 2012 #3
I think he means using "nuclear" to refer uniquely to one or two parts of "nuclear". FBaggins Jun 2012 #4
Its nuclear fission I have an issue with. FogerRox Jun 2012 #5
Do you really think the OP lends itself to confusion... kristopher Jun 2012 #13
Not the OP by itself, that why I phrased my comment that way, leaving the OP not mentioned FogerRox Jun 2012 #16
More than one fusion reaction PamW Jun 2012 #17
Quoting myself "the fusion reaction itself creates no neutrons. " in reference to P-B11 fusion FogerRox Jun 2012 #18
More fun, one of the fuel combo results I stated above is inaccurate..... FogerRox Jun 2012 #19
At first glance... PamW Jun 2012 #21
Correct on the DD, 50% of reactions creates a neutron. Excellent. FogerRox Jun 2012 #24
The problem is .... PamW Jun 2012 #25
HE reactors on the Moon FogerRox Jun 2012 #27
Does Todd Riders work on wire gridded cathode Inertial electrostatic confinement FogerRox Jun 2012 #31
B11 + alpha = 14N joshcryer Jun 2012 #26
The neutrons come from the C12 and the Be8, when they split. FogerRox Jun 2012 #28
The alpha neutrons far outweigh the C12 neutrons, though. joshcryer Jun 2012 #29
You've had nearly 2 days to figure it out.... FogerRox Jun 2012 #20
I have better things to do PamW Jun 2012 #22
This message was self-deleted by its author FogerRox Jun 2012 #23
In general, cults like to call other more reputable groups... NNadir Jun 2012 #6
In the time it takes to build one (1) nuclear plant kristopher Jun 2012 #7
So what? FBaggins Jun 2012 #8
The claim that urgency to address climate change justifies building nuclear is false. kristopher Jun 2012 #9
Wrong as usual. FBaggins Jun 2012 #10
There is no way the nuclear plant can make up that 54 reactor year deficit. kristopher Jun 2012 #11
It doesn't need to because the "deficit" doesn't exist. FBaggins Jun 2012 #12
It is a comparison of the opportunity costs of time, Baggins. kristopher Jun 2012 #14
No... it really isn't. FBaggins Jun 2012 #15
You need to learn "kristopher speak" PamW Jun 2012 #30
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Zealots of the Atom: The ...»Reply #6