Ok here is a serious question...

[nadinbrzezinski]

how long UNTIL OUR government actually says more about this nuclear emergency? The disaster is now pretty much global, and why Search and Rescue needs to happen, relieve needs to happen... how long UNTIL governments in North America (we are down wind) start taking action to advise their respective populations?

Incidentally I don't think outside the blogosphere most people are aware how serious this shit is.

[inademv]

1. What would you want them to say?

I mean, with countries like Haiti, their shit was beyond fucked because the country itself is 2 steps away from complete collapse on a good day. Japan has their shit together.

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. Check the wind patterns to understand what I mean

This is NOW A GLOBAL EVENT

[inademv]

34. The hell are you talking about

As of writing this there hasn't been a meltdown and the chance of a Chernobyl style blowout is all but impossible at this point.

[Joe the Revelator]

36. This post will be alerted, and deleted, but this is the OP's MO...Fear Mongering without the benefit

of proof of what the hell she's talking about. It does a disservice to this board that she's allowed to rant and rave and then have posts asking for proof of her rambling deleted.

[pintobean]

33. Evacuate California now!

:sarcasm:

[petronius]

35. I'm down with that. Everybody else get out now! Leave your valuables behind,

I'll keep an eye on them for you... ;)

[nadinbrzezinski]

37. While you gleefuly joke

we have now entered the nightmare stage, and yes... WE ARE downwind, and they should be telling people what to do.. .if radiation levels (even with time\distance) go over a certain parameter.

By the way... there is no safe exposure level either.

But you laugh ok.

[stockholmer]

3. here is an every-3-minute updated radiation counter map for the USA

http://www.radiationnetwork.com/RadiationNetwork.htm

there are probably better ones out there, but it's a start

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. thanks I mean for us, DHS

[Scottybeamer70]

25. Thank you, stockholmer

that is a really cool map. I had no idea there were so many nuclear power plants
in this country. Talk about a disaster waiting to happen!!!

[dixiegrrrrl]

29. What an amazing tool. Many thanks.

[Tx4obama]

4. I would like to know why the hell that plant was allowed to be built so close to the water

That was the most idiotic thing to do - it should never have been built right there on the edge of the coast.
They must have known (before it was built) that if there were ever a full melt down and the radiation were to seep into the ground that it would end up in the water and then travel across the sea!

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. They ARE built right on the coast

check San Onofre

[Tx4obama]

12. Perhaps a few are but not the majority are not. n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

14. They are built by large bodies of water

this is all of them... it is kind of an engineering requirement.

[Tripod]

8. It has happened before.

[upi402]

10. My thoughts exactly. Japan is held up as a model

yet they build nuke plants on 3 tectonic plates, right on the shore of a tsunami zone.

Yeah, I need some explainin'

[nadinbrzezinski]

11. By the water, so they can get water to be purifed

for the reactor.

This is San Onofre



It is built ON A MAPPED branched of the San Andreas, not near it, ON IT.

Oh did I mention the sandy substrate?

We have a 7.5 I do not think it will make it. a 9.0 I am positive it will not.

[Tx4obama]

15. They do not have to be built that close to the water.

The nuclear plant that is 7 miles from my aunt's house in Illinois is in the middle of miles of corn fields - no where at all close to a coastline! There is a 2,058 acre man made lake there.

[nadinbrzezinski]

16. reactor type? and I am sure it has some access to water

They need it. For starters what they do is boil water, to run a turbine... that is what they do. (For the record so do the coal fired plants, and the LG plants)

[Tx4obama]

18. There is a 2,058 acre man made lake there.

So, they do not 'have to' be put on the coastline.

[nadinbrzezinski]

20. But they need water,

and tehy are usually put by coasts. unless they can't

The US is a continental mass... so they like to use natural bodies (to save money) if they can, starting with Savannah River.

Japan is not a continental mass, so yes they will have them by water. Look at a facility map for the US... on coast states they tend to line the coast. In the main they tend to be by bodies of water. A few times they wil build a lake.

[Tx4obama]

21. Yes, but my point was they do not 'have to' be put right on the coast.

Too much danger of being hit by tsunami, hurricane, etc.
If the inland states can do it, then the states with coastlines ought to be able to do it to.

[nadinbrzezinski]

22. Here is Japan for you

http://www.freeworldmaps.net/asia/japan/honshu.html

Tell me where are the large lakes et al?

By the way many of them in the US are IN THE MISSISSIPPI VALLEY

[JVS]

24. Most of those are on rivers though.

[Tx4obama]

19. The plant has two General Electric boiling water reactors. n/t

[upi402]

26. Kind of odd to me

They must desalinize it and distil it. The debate for a while in Japan was over destroying it by pumping sea water to cool it. All I know is, it's not a good thing to roll the dice with.

[JVS]

23. Access to water is a requirement for cooling systems.

Now, why they didn't have better preparations for a Tsunami is worth asking.

The way cooling systems work is that there are many rings of heat exchangers. So inside you'll have a primary ring of liquid being used for steam. Around that is a loop of coolant that keeps the inner most ring from overheating. Then is more rings, and finally an outer ring that circulates water with the outer environment.



Here is a picture. Only the red water has been in contact with radioactive materials. In an emergency water will be pumped directly from a fresh source in through the circuit that contains the cooling tower and is not recirculated because rather than have re-cooled (which is not so cold) water go back in they want maximal cooling.

[Tripod]

5. Serious shit.

[Poll_Blind]

9. I was thinking about this earlier today- it's an important thought.

I'm of the mind that the current administration is likely getting all of their ducks in a row behind the scenes, taking up the slack where they need to and just...getting ready.

You remember how it was like after the Ductape Fatwa- I mean, some people and at least one family died from sealing themselves into places where they couldn't get enough oxygen. Nobody wants to court (even unintentionally) that kind of panic unless the situation is known beyond a doubt to be dire.

Much earlier today I remember thinking that it was odd that nobody was coming on TV to say "If this shit starts blowing over here, we've got a plan in place." Again, I'm hoping it's because they want to keep it as low key as possible unless they absolutely have to show their hand.

But I dunno...

I meant to write DeFazio and Wyden about it. I should send those out tomorrow but, God bless 'em, I'm sure they're already on the ball.

PB

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. I hope I am wrong

but there is distance\ time from there... and they perhaps are thinking BEST case, where we have almost no release and almost none going to the trade winds.

I have the feeling that worst casing is not a thing they do well in DC. I may have to call my reps and ask. And yes I know worst case means a lot of stuff I really do not want to consider.

[dixiegrrrrl]

30. Sadly for Japan, our FEMA has promised to help.

Meanwhile, Homeland Security has said nothing that I could fine.

[Rabblevox]

17. GODS DAMN IT ALL! I WANT TO SCREAM AND BREAK SOMETHING AND HIT ...

someone. We tried and tried and tried to tell the fucks that exactly this would happen with Diablo Canyon back in the late 70's-early 80's. Thousands of us went to jail, there were thousands of hours of expert testimony. And we lost, completely.

Fuck me with a chainsaw, but does it take a towering intellect to realize that building nuke plants near coastal fault lines is probably a really fucking bad idea?

[upi402]

27. Tidal energy generation is the way to go

Snohomish County PUD in NW WA State is working with FERC getting one going. There's a ton of environmental studies and mitigation being done and that system is no where near what these things are in terms of danger.

[Gravel Democrat]

28. Bingo. And even now they have the audacity to speak to us like we are 5th graders

Condescending and disgusting, they actually think they're winning the argument.

We've had 30+ years of totally incompetent "leadership" on the energy issue from both parties.

Or maybe they are competent in keeping secrets. Either way, us Americans have been played like violins.

While you were protesting Diablo (what could go wrong with a nuclear plant built on a fault named diablo?) I was at San Onofre.



Brisban Solar, european photovoltaic modules manufacturer, installed BS180-190 monocrystaline modules for the execution of a 30 MW solar farm.

The solar plant will be the largest and will triple the current size of the largest photovoltaic plant in the country.

The 30 MW power installations will consist of 172,000 modules of 180 and 190Wp. The park will avoid the emission into the atmosphere of 72,900 tons of CO2 and cover energy demand for 22,283 homes.

Brisban Solar enters a strategic market that has seen how investment in photovoltaics has grown more than 60% during the first half of 2009.

Such investment is aligned with the strategy of the international expansion of Brisban, who pretends to maintain and develop into different world countries.

http://eng.sfe-solar.com/brisban-supplies-30mw-of-photovoltaic-modules-bs180-190s-monocrystalline/

[Shandris]

31. At a 3' by 2' conservative estimate, that's 1,032,000 sq feet (!)

For less than half the homes of a moderate-sized American city (not counting business, municipals, and so forth).

WOW.

I think my math is off somewhere...because otherwise that's 198 square miles -- BIGGER than the city it's half-powering? Someone help me out here.

I used 172000 modules * 3 * 2 for sq ft, divided by ~5200 ft in a mile.

Edit: GAH! Found a conversion calculator online, I THOUGHT that number seemed off. *blush* .03 square miles. Woulda thought bigger than that, but...that's certainly more manageable.

[CountAllVotes]

32. there is one nearby to where I once lived

It has been closed down for a long time because the cancer rates near it are very high. Closing it did not change this grim fact. However, at least it has been shut-down. :argh:

Time to end all nuclear power and shut these sonzabitches down for good. NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:kick: