|
I’m struggling to think of what the actual terrorist scenario is for nuclear plants. I can’t imagine you can easily remove active or used fuel without seriously endangering your health in a very rapid way, so is the concern that terrorists can somehow manufacture a meltdown or venting of materials?
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2021 09:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 18:59 |
|
|
Capt.Whorebags posted:I’m struggling to think of what the actual terrorist scenario is for nuclear plants. I can’t imagine you can easily remove active or used fuel without seriously endangering your health in a very rapid way, so is the concern that terrorists can somehow manufacture a meltdown or venting of materials? Identify those plants that have spent fuel stored in non-reinforced structures and crash a plane into it, thus causing a "dirty bomb" of sorts? Still not sure that it'd really be all that successful though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2021 09:42
|
|
|
Dirty bombs are also sort of... not really a thing, at least not radiological ones. Every single analysis of a dirty bomb attack I have ever seen predicts a death toll under 10 people when activated in an area with a population density comparable to Times Square - but quite a few analyses also suggest a death toll of zero. Also, the best material to use in a dirty bomb attack would come from medical equipment and not nuclear reactors. If you ever see someone talking about the dangers of a dirty bomb as a downside to nuclear power, they are trying to use fear to mislead you. Attacks on plants are potentially a bigger risk, but are again of relatively low concern. The only attack I can think of off the top of my head that was successfully carried out was against the Superphoenix reactor in France, but the rocket failed to penetrate the containment vessel, because it's a containment vessel.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2021 10:31
|
|
|
Capt.Whorebags posted:I’m struggling to think of what the actual terrorist scenario is for nuclear plants. I can’t imagine you can easily remove active or used fuel without seriously endangering your health in a very rapid way, so is the concern that terrorists can somehow manufacture a meltdown or venting of materials? I imagine the worst thing that happens is they bring a plant offline, which would be pretty significant just because of how much power they produce.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2021 11:11
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:I imagine the worst thing that happens is they bring a plant offline, which would be pretty significant just because of how much power they produce. You could achieve the same thing much more easily by knocking down the 400kv pylons leading away from the plant. Given how many terrorists are engineers, it's surprising none of them think of this. But then I guess they don't get to kill people directly, which appears to be the point.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2021 12:57
|
|
|
Terrorists are political actors, the practical engineering solution is rarely politically expedient. Truly, engineers are unduly hampered by politics the world over.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2021 13:24
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:I want to highlight one quote Take a look at the title of the person they quoted. Their primary concern isn't environmentalism, it's nuclear disarmament; the thinking being that if the public is turned against nuclear power, it becomes less tenable to maintain the infrastructure for nuclear weapons. It's not a stupid take, it's dishonest.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2021 21:20
|
|
|
It's both, really
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2021 00:19
|
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:Take a look at the title of the person they quoted. Their primary concern isn't environmentalism, it's nuclear disarmament; the thinking being that if the public is turned against nuclear power, it becomes less tenable to maintain the infrastructure for nuclear weapons. Its both stupid and dishonest. Even moreso when they bemoan nuclear waste but have no real plan to address the very real impact of Carbon/Methane emissions which is doing far more damage.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2021 04:05
|
|
|
aniviron posted:Dirty bombs are also sort of... not really a thing, at least not radiological ones. Every single analysis of a dirty bomb attack I have ever seen predicts a death toll under 10 people when activated in an area with a population density comparable to Times Square - but quite a few analyses also suggest a death toll of zero. Also, the best material to use in a dirty bomb attack would come from medical equipment and not nuclear reactors. If you ever see someone talking about the dangers of a dirty bomb as a downside to nuclear power, they are trying to use fear to mislead you. It’s a psychological weapon. If one happened in a major metro area it would be a real mess
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2021 04:28
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Its both stupid and dishonest. Even moreso when they bemoan nuclear waste but have no real plan to address the very real impact of Carbon/Methane emissions which is doing far more damage. but what if the nuclear waste hurts a hypothetical far far future human or intelligent species?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2021 04:31
|
|
|
VideoGameVet posted:It’s a psychological weapon. If one happened in a major metro area it would be a real mess But a normal bomb is also a psychological weapon and would make just as much of a mess, but nobody bemoans that farming creates such easy access to weaponizable fertilizer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2021 04:32
|
|
|
isnt fertilizer harder to weaponized due to OK City, not to mentione that stores have to report suspiciously large purchases.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2021 04:35
|
|
|
There are controls on it - specifically, most fertilizers contain chemical markers to help identify where they came from, and purchases that seem suspicious can be flagged. Neither of those things would actually stop someone who wanted to make a bomb though, it would just help find them afterwards; nor are they the sort of stringent, foolproof methods that could never be evaded.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2021 05:03
|
|
|
aniviron posted:But a normal bomb is also a psychological weapon and would make just as much of a mess, but nobody bemoans that farming creates such easy access to weaponizable fertilizer. The fear of radiation combined with the mistrust of authorities would make the area uninhabitable for a good long time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2021 06:42
|
|
|
VideoGameVet posted:The fear of radiation combined with the mistrust of authorities would make the area uninhabitable for a good long time. Except for all the places that didn't happen like Hiroshima and Nagasaki to name a few.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2021 12:52
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Except for all the places that didn't happen like Hiroshima and Nagasaki to name a few. At the time there was no such disproportionate nuclear fear; it was the era of radium watch dials. If you disassembled the guts of a hospital radiotherapy machine, scattered it across Times Square, and called it a dirty bomb, probably no one would be killed. But it would be at least a decade before it reopened.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2021 13:23
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Its both stupid and dishonest. Even moreso when they bemoan nuclear waste but have no real plan to address the very real impact of Carbon/Methane emissions which is doing far more damage. They are a traditional nuclear disarmament org. Why would they give a gently caress about carbon/methane emissions? Especially when one of their stated goals is the closure of the nuclear power industry? Elimination of British nuclear weapons and global abolition of nuclear weapons Cancellation of Trident by the British government. And policy not to replace or enhance Trident nor develop, purchase or deploy other nuclear weapons or allow the deployment of any foreign nuclear weapons on British soil or in British waters. An all encompassing Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty is agreed. Implementation of an arms conversion policy by the British government Immediate negotiations leading swiftly to the rapid, timetabled abolition of nuclear forces worldwide and the conclusion of a Nuclear Weapons Convention Prevention and cessation of wars in which the nuclear weapons of Britain or other countries might be used Abolition of other threats of mass destruction or indiscriminate effect Full international compliance with agreed Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) A strengthened Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) agreed Global abandonment of space weapons and missile defence programmes. An international agreement on the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space Implementation of a ban on the manufacture, testing and use of Depleted Uranium weapons Nuclear-free, less militarised and more secure Europe Extension of the influence, resources and funding of the Organisation for Security and Co- Operation on Europe (OSCE) No military nuclearisation of the European Union Withdrawal of all US military bases and nuclear weapons from Europe and no nuclear or other expansion of NATO Formal Nuclear Weapon-Free Zones in Europe established. Britain withdrawn from NATO and all foreign military bases on British soil closed. The closure of the nuclear power industry Prevention of new build nuclear power stations and replacement of nuclear by universally acceptable sustainable energy technologies Establishment of safe policies on nuclear waste storage and on re- use of contaminated land transport of plutonium and depleted uranium Independent control and verification of plutonium, uranium and depleted uranium stocks. Dante80 fucked around with this message at 13:32 on Nov 22, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2021 13:25
|
|
|
radmonger posted:scattered it across Times Square, and called it a dirty bomb, probably no one would be killed. But it would be at least a decade before it reopened. I am still not seeing a downside.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2021 21:19
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Except for all the places that didn't happen like Hiroshima and Nagasaki to name a few. That's Japan after a major defeat with most of the cities (other than Kyoto) in ashes. You think if Central Park West was dirty-bombed people would move back?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2021 02:45
|
|
|
VideoGameVet posted:That's Japan after a major defeat with most of the cities (other than Kyoto) in ashes. The point being that Hiroshima and Nagasaki are healthy, burgeoning cities, and had reached their pre-war population levels by the 1950s. And like has already said: The fear of dirty bombs is entirely overblown.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2021 03:27
|
|
|
Dante80 posted:They are a traditional nuclear disarmament org. Why would they give a gently caress about carbon/methane emissions? Especially when one of their stated goals is the closure of the nuclear power industry? Well for starters they specifically say they want nuclear plants to be replaced with sustainable energy and if they actually gave a poo poo about that then they'd be concerned about all of the not sustainable and dirty generation that 100% of the time replaces nuclear power in the form of natgas, mostly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2021 04:29
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:The point being that Hiroshima and Nagasaki are healthy, burgeoning cities, and had reached their pre-war population levels by the 1950s. Yes it is, and there's no reason whatsoever people can't live in the Fukushima Exclusion Zone. And yet, it's still an exclusion zone.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2021 04:46
|
|
|
I looked a few pages back and didn't see anything, so apologies if this has been covered. US Republicans seem to be gearing up to obstruct green energy initiatives as much as possible by suddenly and cynically caring about human rights in solar panel and battery supply chains. China dominates both supply chains. The whole PV supply chain is in Xinjiang, from sand mines to assembly. Cobalt mining and trading in DRC is overwhelmingly done by Chinese firms, too, and I think all the downstream stuff like smelter and assembly is in China. I don't want to ignore the human rights issues, because they're real. It is somewhat depressing to think that environmental sustainability will come at such a moral cost. But what really can be done? I doubt there is much willingness on behalf of Chinese suppliers to reform their practices. Investment in building alternative supplies would take 5-10 years at least, would cost way more than anyone is willing to pony up, and might still be behind China by almost any measure. Tech solutions like cobalt-free batteries likewise seem far off and uncertain.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2021 04:53
|
|
|
Smeef posted:I looked a few pages back and didn't see anything, so apologies if this has been covered. Now what we gotta do is quantify just how much suffering is tolerable to sustain the standard of living that we want! Easy Peasy, now it's just an economics issue with that engineering out of the way.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2021 14:49
|
|
|
Smeef posted:I looked a few pages back and didn't see anything, so apologies if this has been covered. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2021 16:06
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:The point being that Hiroshima and Nagasaki are healthy, burgeoning cities, and had reached their pre-war population levels by the 1950s. I agree. My point is USA citizens have that "overblown fear."
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2021 16:07
|
|
|
VideoGameVet posted:I agree. My point is USA citizens have that "overblown fear." Ah, my bad then.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2021 16:08
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Yes it is, and there's no reason whatsoever people can't live in the Fukushima Exclusion Zone. Hey wait, I thought it was something about how if some little kid dug into the dirt from around there, they’d end up covered in something or another that binds to their bones. Please, correct me if I’m wrong. I also remember the photos of a giant radioactive plume in the ocean too heading for the west coast of the us. If you could explain why that wasn’t dangerous I’d also really appreciate it. Does this mean Chernobyl’s exclusion zone isn’t that bad too? All I know about nukelear power I learn from watching HBO documentaries and reading this thread, so pls snd hlp, idgi.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2021 21:21
|
|
|
Solvent posted:Hey wait, I thought it was something about how if some little kid dug into the dirt from around there, they’d end up covered in something or another that binds to their bones. They already treated the dirt by removing the top layer of soil. As for the radioactive plume: That was an incredibly misleading campaign of disinformation: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/fukushima-emergency/ Radioisotopes in ocean water dilute to nearly nothing. If Fukushima's release had been capable of something like that, the sheer amount of radioactive waste from nuclear weapons testing in the Pacific would've rendered the Pacific dead 40 years ago. But thankfully, that's not how radiation nor chemistry works. Also, in Fukushima's case, the bigger issue is radioisotopes from the waste cooling water used to cool down the reactors during and after the meltdown, but for the most part they've setup a very sophisticated filtering system that leaves very little in the way of radioisotopes in the water other than Tritium, but even in that case its such a low level that when its released into the ocean it'll get diluted to nearly nothing. Chernobyl's exclusion zone is both overblown and still applies, mostly because Chernobyl had a different issue: The spread of radioisotopes from the smoke of the reactor graphite burning and spreading it across the exclusion zone, however, for the most part the radioactivity in the Exclusion zone outside the immediate reactor is safe now, its still recommended you do not eat plants nor animals from the exclusion zone because of the uptake of longer lived isotopes like Strontium and Cesium CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 21:31 on Nov 23, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2021 21:28
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Chernobyl's exclusion zone is both overblown and still applies, mostly because Chernobyl had a different issue: The spread of radioisotopes from the smoke of the reactor graphite burning and spreading it across the exclusion zone, however, for the most part the radioactivity in the Exclusion zone outside the immediate reactor is safe now, its still recommended you do not eat plants nor animals from the exclusion zone because of the uptake of longer lived isotopes like Strontium and Cesium Radioactive fallout is bad partly because those isotopes like Strontium and Cesium are radioactive, but mostly because they're A) poisonous heavy metals, B) if you inhale or ingest the already poisonous dust, the radiation has easy access to parts of your body the radiation can damage, and C) the combination of poisonous heavy metals and radiation often means they get concentrated in a particular place that processes toxins before they cause the DNA damage there. It's bad because it's hard to clean up that extremely thin layer of inorganic dust (which doesn't really ever get cleaned up by normal decomposition), and hard to avoid kicking it up, not because the dust is especially lethal.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2021 21:41
|
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:In short, these kinds of radioactive hazards aren't like the criticality accidents that killed scientists during the Manhattan Project or the dangers of X-Ray machines, or the Elephant's Foot that killed emergency workers in Chernobyl. There aren't invisible beta/gamma rays saturating the landscape that give you radiation poisoning. Most of the radiation there can't penetrate your skin to actually cause cellular damage, as long as you don't walk into the room where the Corium is sitting. Yes, this. Most of the radioactive waste products are mostly Alpha and Beta emitters with some Gamma mixed in, which is a nothingburger for humans as long as its OUTSIDE your body. We've lived with this natural radiation since the beginning of time. Its when it gets past your bodies external defenses that bad stuff happens. That's why Radon is such an issue, because we can breathe it in and it gets into your lungs. Its also worth remembering: Stuff like Strontium and Cesium have very short half lives. Strontium-90 has a half life of about 28 Compare that to stuff like damage from Oil spills, Chemical spills, which will remain basically until the end of time....yeah, its not nearly as bad as being made out. CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 21:56 on Nov 23, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2021 21:43
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Its also worth remembering: Stuff like Strontium and Cesium have very short half lives. Strontium-90 has a half life of about 28 days That's years, not days. Strontium is chemically similar to calcium, and if you uptake any about 80% is excreted and the rest goes right to your bones. So that is definitely an isotope of concern. The biggest danger to kids is I-131, because iodine is essential for thyroid function so any that's inhaled or ingested concentrates in that gland, sitting there irradiating it with betas (it's not anywhere near as dangerous for adults because the adults probably aren't going to live long enough for the thyroid cancer to develop). I-131 is a major fission product, but fortunately it does have a short half-life of 8 days, and it decays to stable xenon. So basically after 80 days there isn't any I-131 left.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2021 21:55
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:That's years, not days. Strontium is chemically similar to calcium, and if you uptake any about 80% is excreted and the rest goes right to your bones. So that is definitely an isotope of concern. Correct, I mistyped. Strontium-89 is used in Bone Cancer treatments, and Strontium-90 is used against Melanomas CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 21:59 on Nov 23, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2021 21:57
|
|
|
Humans are the real monsters, the exclusion zones have become green spaces, where wildlife thrives in the humanfree oasis. If Time Sqaure became one, it would also make a minor break in NYC massive urban heat island.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2021 21:58
|
|
|
Has there been any publicly released data from animals collected outside the Chernobyl zone but near by it that tracks the amount of Cesium et al is present in their systems? I imagine for the most part unless you have a migratory species that regularly passes directly through the zone the spill over would not be too much. Or if the animals had particularly large ranges that had some percent overlap with the zone.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2021 22:03
|
|
|
Dameius posted:Has there been any publicly released data from animals collected outside the Chernobyl zone but near by it that tracks the amount of Cesium et al is present in their systems? I imagine for the most part unless you have a migratory species that regularly passes directly through the zone the spill over would not be too kuch. There's a lot of studies going on in the Chernobyl Exclusion zone since its pretty much the largest wildlife reserve in Eastern Europe. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0265931X17309347
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2021 22:05
|
|
|
Things are getting a little dire here in Europe as far as energy prices go... (Poland uses coal).
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 19:10
|
|
|
Its worth noting France is rate following and is raking in the cash this way. https://twitter.com/calebwatney/status/1463263021942329351?s=20
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 22:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 18:59 |
|
|
Want to understand the future of Oil and Gas? Look no further than this insanely detailed article, it's one of the best explanations I've come across yet - https://twitter.com/ArjunNMurti/status/1463315801679740928?s=20 https://twitter.com/ArjunNMurti/status/1463315814132719618?s=20
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2021 00:12
|
|
