|
Carbon dioxide posted:Huh, I've never seen the 2nd sign before. Yep. That's the point. edit: oshasnype 
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 15:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 12:04 |
|
|
What is that? A bucket of wallets? Edit: Near the end of that article it talks about the "one stuck rod" criterion, so apparently this reactor was designed in a way that was known to be a really bad idea, but the article doesn't say why it was done that way. This NASA case study explains it far better. LookieLoo fucked around with this message at 15:42 on Apr 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 15:08
|
|
|
LookieLoo posted:What is that? A bucket of wallets? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SL-1 One of the most hilarious nuclear accidents in history. wikipedia posted:One of the shield plugs on top of the reactor vessel impaled the third man through his groin and exited his shoulder, pinning him to the ceiling.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 15:11
|
|
|
StarkingBarfish posted:This is why there are now two radiation hazard symbols. This is the one we're all familiar with:
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 15:25
|
|
'. This signage is new as of 2007, and was made after extensive research as an answer to the goiania incident. The problem with the first sign is that few people actually know what it means, while in the second the skull and bones and the gtfo are much easier to understand. The red sign would be behind the safety shielding such that anyone breaking into it for scrap would see this sign physically close to the source of immediate danger. You can read a little more about it here:
|
zedprime posted:Jokes on the IAEA. As a looter when I see a skull, I think "better be careful, this is valuable!" No doubt, but you probably won't be spreading it on your 6yr old daughter's sandwich anymore.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 15:32
|
|
|
zedprime posted:Jokes on the IAEA. As a looter when I see a skull, I think "better be careful, this is valuable!" I remember reading an article about long term(10'000+ years) safe storage of nuclear, which mentioned that warning signs and Physical determinants like spikes might have an opposite effect, with people unfamiliar with nuclear waste seeing them and thinking, what ever is being hidden here must be really loving good if they're going to all this effort to make sure no one gets to it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 15:39
|
|
|
dr_rat posted:I remember reading an article about long term(10'000+ years) safe storage of nuclear, which mentioned that warning signs and Physical determinants like spikes might have an opposite effect, with people unfamiliar with nuclear waste seeing them and thinking, what ever is being hidden here must be really loving good if they're going to all this effort to make sure no one gets to it. This place is not a place of honor. No highly esteemed deed is commemorated here. Nothing valued is here. This place is a message and part of a system of messages. Pay attention to it! Sending this message was important to us. We considered ourselves to be a powerful culture.  http://www.wipp.energy.gov/picsprog/articles/wipp%20exhibit%20message%20to%2012,000%20a_d.htm
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 15:41
|
|
|
http://99percentinvisible.org/episode/ten-thousand-years/ The great podcast 99% invisible did an episode on it. Includes fluorescent cats and warnings in folk songs, worth a listen.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 15:46
|
|
|
StarkingBarfish posted:This place is not a place of honor. It's sad that for that specific one there's tension in the thorns and they'll degrade faster than the other options because I love the gently caress Off value of a giant patch of giant black concrete thorns in the middle of the desert.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 15:57
|
|
|
Wasn't it determined that none of those things to deter future humans would work because it would just make us more curious?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 20:24
|
|
|
CampingCarl posted:Wasn't it determined that none of those things to deter future humans would work because it would just make us more curious? Pretty much. You'd be better off with a rosetta stone carved from granite and placed inside the entrance to the facility and in front of every storage vault. Or filling the thing with poison gas or something. The evil cave of evil kills all who enter it! We should avoid it!
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 20:45
|
|
|
Methylethylaldehyde posted:Pretty much. You'd be better off with a rosetta stone carved from granite and placed inside the entrance to the facility and in front of every storage vault. Or filling the thing with poison gas or something. The evil cave of evil kills all who enter it! We should avoid it! Making the deterrent kill people who enter kind of defeats the purpose of trying to keep people away from dangerous poo poo that would kill them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 20:52
|
|
|
uPen posted:Making the deterrent kill people who enter kind of defeats the purpose of trying to keep people away from dangerous poo poo that would kill them. Yeah but if it's something that causes immediate pain and obvious acute sickness (which both go away after a while) they might never reach the stuff that gives the entire community cancer six months after they steal it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 20:54
|
|
|
But the point wasn't that the center contained the radioactive material. It was all buried beneath the structure. The surface just has multiple points of communication with more detail/greater information available towards the center as a way to escalate the danger/attempt to point people away from the stuff buried beneath their feet.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 20:56
|
|
|
StarkingBarfish posted:This place is not a place of honor. I call dibs on this for a tombstone inscription.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 20:58
|
|
|
Written warnings of doom and danger don't work either, even if they're understood; we've been advertising curses against people who defile tombs, but the only tombs that stay intact are the ones that stay hidden.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 20:58
|
|
|
What's the point of a big thorn-scape to scare away cave people? Just bury it, fill in the tunnels, and bulldoze the entrance so there is no sign of anything there. If you bury it in some place with no usable minerals or gems, then there is pretty much no reason for any future people to dig there. No matter what kind of warning you put in front of hazardous waste, one of two things is going to happen. 1. They have advanced to the point where their Geiger counters go bananas and they say, "nuclear waste" let's not fool around with it. 2. "Ook ook, bunga bunga" and they crack the containers open with a stone and have a wicked glow-in-the-dark caveman orgy in a pool of waste.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 21:00
|
|
|
 A bunch of russians drive through a wildfire  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpwJJnC7MuM
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 21:10
|
|
|
why not just have an empty but real hard to access vault in a larger vault that has the waste in the floor so anybody trying to get black bart's gold dies of poisoning before the vault is opened?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 21:12
|
|
|
Blistex posted:What's the point of a big thorn-scape to scare away cave people? Just bury it, fill in the tunnels, and bulldoze the entrance so there is no sign of anything there. If you bury it in some place with no usable minerals or gems, then there is pretty much no reason for any future people to dig there. No matter what kind of warning you put in front of hazardous waste, one of two things is going to happen. Dig a huge big hole, fill it in. Then build a massive, empty decoy labyrinth five miles away. Who's going to go digging in the desert when you have an important relic to discover in a maze nearby? I do like the radioactive cats though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 21:14
|
|
|
ekuNNN posted:
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 21:18
|
|
|
Blistex posted:What's the point of a big thorn-scape to scare away cave people? Part of it is to explore whether there's any amount of metaphor and symbology that could keep a waste site from being tampered with, but metaphor and symbols and communication in general is all contextual: one being's keep out" is another being's "please enter" whether you're expressing it with words or fields of spikes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 21:20
|
|
|
They even had to reject comic-style pictorial warnings, as it's just as likely that a future civilization reads from right to left instead of left to right like we do and mistakes a "This will make you die" warning for a "This will bring you to life" instruction manual. Anything that serves the purpose of wordlessly scaring people away has just as much chance of pulling a reverse psychology and convincing them that they're being scared away to keep them from getting the really valuable stuff. The only way to actually keep people away from it is to make sure they don't search at all. Put it somewhere with nothing valuable around and bury it deeper than any primitive civilization would go in search of minerals and iron, then encase it in concrete to prevent access anyway. Hell, make it release an extremely fast-acting contact or inhaled poison that causes enough pain and discomfort (and potentially death, if you really need to) to make them run and seal it back up if they get too curious. Better to poison half a dozen curious explorers than give them an opening to drag radioactive waste back to their towns and put it on display or rub it on everyone's food.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 21:20
|
|
|
Hey, I have a crazy idea. Why not properly process the waste until what's left is harmless in a few hundred years instead of tens of thousand. -e- Put a layer of zunes on it to keep people away. Lurking Haro fucked around with this message at 21:27 on Apr 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 21:24
|
|
|
D1Sergo posted:Part of it is to explore whether there's any amount of metaphor and symbology that could keep a waste site from being tampered with, but metaphor and symbols and communication in general is all contextual: one being's keep out" is another being's "please enter" whether you're expressing it with words or fields of spikes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 21:26
|
|
|
Pharaoh wasn't buried with highly radioactive nuclear waste.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 21:51
|
|
|
Lurking Haro posted:Hey, I have a crazy idea. Why not properly process the waste until what's left is harmless in a few hundred years instead of tens of thousand. How dangerous is something that's "hot" for 10,000+ years? Shouldn't things with a high enough decay rate to put out dangerous amounts of radiation have a short enough half life to burn themselves out relatively quickly? amityville anus posted:why not just have an empty but real hard to access vault in a larger vault that has the waste in the floor so anybody trying to get black bart's gold dies of poisoning before the vault is opened? Literally burying it all deep under a mountain in a seismically inactive desert wasn't good enough for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 21:55
|
|
|
DiHK posted:This is a Jay, for pegging.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 21:57
|
|
|
The problem is, it's really quite difficult to bury that much stuff in such a way that someone looking at it a long time later can't figure out "hey someone buried something here." It's not necessarily cave people of the far future we're worried about, either. A culture with ~1800s technology would not necessarily know about or understand radiation, but could probably use a basic understanding of geology to recognize a burial site. We can't really know what knowledge would be retained and what would be lost, for people living in North America 50,000 years from now or whatever. Human civilization is only ~15,000 years old at best, so we can't even look at symbolism that has persisted for all of that time, and be sure we can use similar symbols now that will persist for three or four or five times as long. Pretty much the most we can do is assume that if you draw a figure of an animal on a cave wall, someone 100,000 years from now will probably recognize it as a drawing of an animal.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 22:03
|
|
|
Lurking Haro posted:Hey, I have a crazy idea. Why not properly process the waste until what's left is harmless in a few hundred years instead of tens of thousand. Because LFTR tech isn't really profit-oriented.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 22:39
|
|
|
this is why we have super mutants, people. What better way to keep people away from radioactive waste than having it guarded by giant, grotesque, people-eating monsters?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 22:56
|
|
|
WarpedNaba posted:Because LFTR tech isn't really profit-oriented. Breeder reactors work just fine. If you fear the political red tape (because everyone is afraid the current nuclear weapon wielding nations will use them to make more bombs  ), you can use designs like the CANDU.jetz0r posted:How dangerous is something that's "hot" for 10,000+ years? If it's hot, it's dangerous, it will only take a bit longer to hurt you. +10k years is quick on a geological scale. You want the shortest possible half-life without cooking(literally, stuff gets hot) your storage facility. It will also drastically reduce the volume you'll have to store. For OSHA-relevancy: many nuclear plants store their waste on-site. Lurking Haro fucked around with this message at 23:24 on Apr 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 23:00
|
|
|
These nuclear waste activities are done for PR purposes. They are not actually intended to be built, but the system goes through the motions in order to address certain kinds of whiny criticism. Like people seriously raise the possibility that waste storage might be breached by stray asteroid impacts and therefore NIMBY. The amusing thing is how seriously journalists take it. But it fills up space on the page so people keep talking about it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 23:10
|
|
|
Why not make fusion reactors that use fission waste and make a never ending reactor human centipede
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 23:14
|
|
|
Most nuclear waste is not spent fuel. It's carbon rods, it's containers and buckets and people's irradiated jumpsuits, hunks of concrete shielding. Everything that's been bombarded with neutrons and has become toxic horrible poo poo nobody wants to deal with. You can reprocess spent fuel in breeder reactors, but everything else?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 23:21
|
|
|
A bit of osha.jpg, a bit of architecture failures, and possibly china/jpg as well. http://i.imgur.com/65yWnYM.gifv
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 23:34
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Most nuclear waste is not spent fuel. It's carbon rods, it's containers and buckets and people's irradiated jumpsuits, hunks of concrete shielding. Everything that's been bombarded with neutrons and has become toxic horrible poo poo nobody wants to deal with. Shredder it and thin it down until it's at about background levels. A banana would count as nuclear waste. Terminal storage should be reserved for the truly unrecoverable waste. -e-  Why use rubble in your concrete if you have rubbish? Lurking Haro fucked around with this message at 23:41 on Apr 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 23:35
|
|
|
naem posted:Why not make fusion reactors that use fission waste and make a never ending reactor human centipede Human Singularipede
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 23:39
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 09:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 12:04 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 11:21
|
|