Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: Are there dangers in living near Nuclear Power?  (Read 13438 times)

MaineShark

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5044
Re: Nuclear power (was Re: Where in NH?)
« Reply #15 on: September 06, 2005, 06:48:00 pm »

On a related note... An Alaskan village plans to go nuclear.

If a "micro-nuke" will power a village of 400, maybe a few "mini-nukes" would be the way to go for NH.  True, it's not the completely self-sufficient power source that many people want, but we could import and stockpile a relatively small amount of fissile material, and it would last a very long time...

Joe
Logged
"An armed society is a polite society" - this does not mean that we are polite because we fear each other.

We are not civilized because we are armed; we are armed because we are civilized..

mvpel

  • FSP Participant
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 387
    • Aidoann
Re: Nuclear power (was Re: Where in NH?)
« Reply #16 on: September 07, 2005, 08:41:50 am »

I recall reading somewhere that someone camped out downwind from Three Mile Island throughout the entire duration of the incident would have received about the same amount of excess radiation exposure as a round-trip cross-country airline flight.
Logged
New Hampshire Notary Public - Merrimack Valley Area - Silver Accepted

Ward Griffiths

  • First 1000
  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1050
  • Canvas and Quicklime
Re: Nuclear power (was Re: Where in NH?)
« Reply #17 on: September 10, 2005, 11:53:26 pm »

I recall reading somewhere that someone camped out downwind from Three Mile Island throughout the entire duration of the incident would have received about the same amount of excess radiation exposure as a round-trip cross-country airline flight.
Rather less, actually.  Heinlein did a good article on the subject in his _Expanded Universe_ anthology.  In fact, a weekend in Wyoming (HI GUYS!) gives you more radiation exposure than you could get at Three Mile Island through the whole "disaster".  Your twice-yearly dental X-rays even more so.
Logged
--
Ward Griffiths    wdg3rd@comcast.net

Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.  (Denis Diderot)

Russell Kanning

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3535
    • We must be the change we wish to see in the world.
Re: Dangers of Nuclear Power?
« Reply #18 on: September 11, 2005, 07:44:12 am »

So what is fema's plan for the NH seacoast?
I hope they will be kind :)
Logged
The NH Underground - "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -Mahatma Gandhi
New Hampshire Free Press - The Nonviolent Revolution Starts Here

"Resolve to serve no more, and you are at once freed. I do not ask that you place hands upon the tyrant to topple him over, but simply that you support him no longer; then you will behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his own weight and break in pieces." -- Etienne de La Boetie, The Politics of Obedience: The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude

MaineShark

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5044
Re: Dangers of Nuclear Power?
« Reply #19 on: September 11, 2005, 02:38:22 pm »

It would be necessary to include alpha and beta exposure, as well, if one wanted an accurate picture of the exposure levels.  Gamma is not very dangerous to humans; beta is the real significant hazard.  Alpha can do more damage, but even a sheet of good paper stops alpha particles, so you really need to be ingesting alpha-emitting material to be injured by it.

They have similar latitudes, so that won't have much influence on cosmic radiation exposure, but Wyoming has a dramatically higher elevation than New Hampshire, which increases exposure.  Most of NH is lower than WY's average elevation.  The average elevation for WY is 5700 feet higher than the average for NH (6700 versus 1000 feet), so WY residents, on average, see about twice the dosage of cosmic radiation.

I'm also pretty sure that WY has a higher level of ground radiation due to mineral deposits.

Anyway, though, I think Ward was comparing WY and PA, not WY and NH.

Joe
Logged
"An armed society is a polite society" - this does not mean that we are polite because we fear each other.

We are not civilized because we are armed; we are armed because we are civilized..

Neill G. Ross

  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4
Re: Dangers of Nuclear Power?
« Reply #20 on: September 11, 2005, 03:33:46 pm »

Seabrook does indeed have a VERY well thought out and complex evacuation plan. This and any other information on Seabrook operations and safety is available free to all at the Seabrook reading room in the public librabry of that town. There are sirens for 10ish miles around the plant and they are LOUD.  I believe that roads have been designed specifically to aide in an evacuation and that the plan calls for contraflor, the use of both sides of the highway on most of them. From the beach, you have 2 lanes north and 2 lanes south on 1A, 2 lanes each west on NH-286 and NH-101, which opens up into 4 past US-1. From the inland portion of Seabrook, you have 4 lanes south, and I believe 8 north on I-95, 2 lanes west on NH-107 and a number of local roads into amesbuty, MA or S. Hampton. Sirens are tested yearly, Seabrook has EAS tv and radio access,.

And of course, no dangerous radiation will ever be relaeased from Sebrook. it's containment dome is the only one in the country designed to withstand a direct hit from a jumbo jet. Security on nuclear power plants has just been raised substantially on a national level. Security personel and fortifications make getting into Cheyenne Mtn look like sneaking into a movie theatre. Noone was killed or injured at Three Mile Island, the core melted into bedrock exactly as it's supposed to in a worst case scenario loss of feedwater and coolant. The company diligently cleaned up. Scientists later realized the explosion everyone was predicting to rain down radioactive waste on the countryside was simply not possible. Chernobyl can not even be equated to US commerical reactors, and scientists and medical experts are even saying that the death toll from that communist cluster#&%$(@ will be far, far less than initially hyperbolized, like, say 60ish people.
Logged

FreeBoB

  • Guest
Re: Dangers of Nuclear Power?
« Reply #21 on: September 11, 2005, 05:11:06 pm »

I don't buy it.  Nothing on this earth is safe and permanent.  A couple of years ago a 1/2 inch floor to ceiling crack appeared in my living room wall - settling it was called - in a 120 year old house.  Nothing like Katrina every hit New Orleans, when San Andreas releases a big one, nothing like that will have ever hit Califoirnia.  And people still choose to live in these timebomb areas.  Do you really trust the NRC or another Federal or State agency to protect us with adequate safety and evacuation planning?  When the sirens go off, most of the residents won't even know what they are and most of them won't leave or will be caught in traffic.  They'll think it's a test or a bureaucratic error.  When the fire alarm goes off in my local health club, people sit there on the bikes and continue to work out.  What a joke!  It's only a matter of time before something else happens, whether in NH or elsewhere.

In the weeks after Three Mile Island there were dead birds, rodents, cats and dogs in the area - I remember the reports.  Radiation was released through the period and there was vomiting and nausea in the community from it.  A simple Google search for 'Three Mile Island illness' shows many reputable sources reporting on underfunded studies, political/corporate payoffs and continued illness to this day attributed to TMI.  Chernobyl continues to kill former area residents, children and adults alike.
Logged

Otosan

  • FSP Participant
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 254
  • I'm ready to move, anywhere, anytime!
Re: Dangers of Nuclear Power?
« Reply #22 on: September 11, 2005, 06:20:14 pm »

For those who may not  know, the reactors in a nuclear plant are used to "boil" the water (change water to super heated steam that is used to turn the turbines in the generators).

There are safer ways of heating water.

The trade off is smoke particals in the air or maybe radiation in the air.

With todays technology the power companies have installed "scrubbers that remove most ot the particulants from the smoke.  But not to my knowledge have the US bulit any type of power generator in several yrs ( AL power built a damn in 79 and Browns Ferry (?) in the 80ths )

I know of 2 nuc plants that were under construction but was halted in the 80ths.
Logged
"The perfect slave is the slave who thinks that he is free."
- [Unknown]
Taxes are the extra money we give the government to do  good things! (2nd grade Social Studies book)

lloydbob1

  • Guest
Re: Dangers of Nuclear Power?
« Reply #23 on: September 11, 2005, 08:54:06 pm »

George, you're right about the scrubbers and we've got a bunch of coal in this country.

Brian, traffic in your neighborhood could account for the settling as could an earthquake like the one in upstate NY one sunday morning a few years ago.
Logged

FreeBoB

  • Guest
Re: Dangers of Nuclear Power?
« Reply #24 on: September 11, 2005, 09:01:18 pm »

George, you're right about the scrubbers and we've got a bunch of coal in this country.

Brian, traffic in your neighborhood could account for the settling as could an earthquake like the one in upstate NY one sunday morning a few years ago.

I remember that earthquake here - I was in bed and the movement was confusing, strange, unknown, then I heard later that day of the quake.  Nothing is permanent except the intangible, like 'change' or the 'yearning for freedom'.
Logged

MaineShark

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5044
Re: Dangers of Nuclear Power?
« Reply #25 on: September 11, 2005, 09:29:28 pm »

What's the big worry?  Worst case scenario, a full meltdown, still doesn't release appreciable levels of radiation.

Our reactors simply cannot do what Chernobyl did.  It's not a matter of "safeguards" that can fail, and trusting the NRC.  It's a simple matter of physics.  We don't use breeder reactors.  That was a damnfool idea that the Soviets had, and the design was unsafe from the beginning.

Modern designs are even safer than the antiquated systems like those at Three Mile Island.  And even at TMI, there was no breach of containment, let alone an explosion like at Chernobyl.

Joe
Logged
"An armed society is a polite society" - this does not mean that we are polite because we fear each other.

We are not civilized because we are armed; we are armed because we are civilized..

JonM

  • First 1000
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1971
Re: Dangers of Nuclear Power?
« Reply #26 on: September 11, 2005, 10:52:42 pm »

Well something's gonna kill you sometime.  Every place you live has some level of risk associated with it.  Scared of a nuclear reactor?  Few places in this country are all that far from some sort of research reactor, if not a full power generating reactor.
Logged

FreeBoB

  • Guest
Re: Dangers of Nuclear Power?
« Reply #27 on: September 12, 2005, 12:15:30 am »

I'll still travel to the seacoast for fun and profit, but I'd prefer not to live near one.  And I ruled out areas in the Gulf and NC that keep getting hit with hurricanes.  Faultlines might be good to avoid as well.   8)
Logged

legion

  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11
Re: Dangers of Nuclear Power?
« Reply #28 on: September 12, 2005, 12:49:45 am »

What's the big worry?  Worst case scenario, a full meltdown, still doesn't release appreciable levels of radiation.

Our reactors simply cannot do what Chernobyl did.  It's not a matter of "safeguards" that can fail, and trusting the NRC.  It's a simple matter of physics.  We don't use breeder reactors.  That was a damnfool idea that the Soviets had, and the design was unsafe from the beginning.

Modern designs are even safer than the antiquated systems like those at Three Mile Island.  And even at TMI, there was no breach of containment, let alone an explosion like at Chernobyl.

Joe

Even then I think they just recently revised the deaths that directly resulted from Chernobyl down to like 60 from the 3000 the figure used to be. I am honestly not afraid of nuclear radiation as I understand that it is the time exposed to it rather than the amount of exposure that is the largest factor in its harming you directly. I have more important things to pay attention to, like my awareness on the road.
Logged

MaineShark

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5044
Re: Dangers of Nuclear Power?
« Reply #29 on: September 12, 2005, 09:44:28 pm »

One plan is not live near the coast within range of either Nuclear Trouble or Hurricane Trouble.

Another plan would be to put a small reactor in my back yard, if the Feds would allow it...

I like that plan, personally.

Joe
Logged
"An armed society is a polite society" - this does not mean that we are polite because we fear each other.

We are not civilized because we are armed; we are armed because we are civilized..
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up