[meteorite-list] OT: RISKS OF NUCLEAR POWER

From: Art <blurtheline_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2011 12:52:40 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTikC2Qdds03+JdgkKjm1wjqjv=2MdF1hqQ3+p2G9_at_mail.gmail.com>

Ok guys, time to stop the off topic thread.

Thanks, Art


On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 12:00 PM, GREG LINDH <geeg48 at msn.com> wrote:
>
>
> ?I'm not a scientist, but from what I've heard and read, huge "solar farms" in desert areas require a lot of water for cleaning, etc. ?These "farms" are put where there is an abundance of sunny days.....the deserts.....where water is scarce. ?I live in Precott Valley, AZ. ?We're already short on water. ?The last thing we need is for our water to go to "solar farms".
> ?I'm all for green energy sources....I just don't think they are practical for producing the huge amounts of energy that a modern society requires.
> ?We need nuclear, oil and coal, in addition to green.
> ?Just my thoughts.
>
>
> ?Greg L.
>
>
>
>
>> From: astroroks at hotmail.com
>> To: stanleygregr at hotmail.com; meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>> Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2011 11:00:22 -0500
>> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] OT: RISKS OF NUCLEAR POWER
>>
>>
>> Wind turbines, (1mega watt each) would need millions of them and they only work when the wind is between 8 and 38 MPH.
>> The Audubon Society hates them for killing migratory and predatory birds...
>> Solar, is just that, no storage for the power and only works when the sun is shining. The State land use committees hate
>> them because they take a lot of land and are ugly....
>> Hydroelectric, Great when you have the available water and it is not interfering with protected fish. That these rivers
>> remain navigable and the spawning is not interrupted.
>> Hey, if they can make a small portable Nuke plant, like the ones on our Nuclear fleet, then they sure should be able
>> to make small nuke plants that would be safe and built in a controlled environment. The USS Ronald Reagan that
>> is just off shore Japan is powered by a 250 MW Westinghouse nuke plant... Needs refueling every 20 years.
>> Dennis O'Miller
>>
>>
>> > From: stanleygregr at hotmail.com
>> > To: sterling_k_webb at sbcglobal.net; meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>> > Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2011 08:29:48 -0700
>> > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] OT: RISKS OF NUCLEAR POWER
>> >
>> >
>> > I wonder how many people have died from solar, wind, and hydroelectric power?
>> >
>> > You forget the long term impact of radiation exposure.
>> >
>> > Don't get me wrong, Nuclear power is good when safety precautions are in place, but we seem to wait for disasters and then respond to them.
>> >
>> > I have been an advocate for 'green' energy since the 1970's, but here in the US, it always gets killed and underfunded.
>> >
>> > Now let's get back to discussing meteorites.
>> >
>> >
>> > Greg S.
>> >
>> > ----------------------------------------
>> > > From: sterling_k_webb at sbcglobal.net
>> > > To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>> > > Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2011 00:38:58 -0500
>> > > Subject: [meteorite-list] OT: RISKS OF NUCLEAR POWER
>> > >
>> > > List,
>> > >
>> > > We are invariably abnormally impressed by the
>> > > sudden occurrence of a rare, high-risk event.
>> > > We do not appraise them in a strictly rational
>> > > manner when this happens.
>> > >
>> > > The current application of fear caused by a very
>> > > rare event, as we see in Japan, is weighted heavily.
>> > > For those interested in the actual data, the human
>> > > cost, in lives, of the various means of electric power
>> > > production are listed below.
>> > >
>> > > Deaths are for the period 1970 through 1992, the
>> > > only period for which data could be collected for all
>> > > the means of production.
>> > >
>> > > All deaths are "immediate" deaths, and the figures
>> > > are on a worldwide basis, which includes countries
>> > > with less stringent industrial safety requirements
>> > > than the U.S. This is the picture for the Planet.
>> > >
>> > > Hydroelectric production accounted for roughly 4000
>> > > deaths, of members of the public, or 883 deaths per
>> > > terawatt-year. The vast majority of those deaths were
>> > > from the failure of dams and impoundments.
>> > >
>> > > Coal power production produced about 6400 deaths,
>> > > all of workers, for a death rate of 342 deaths per
>> > > terawatt-year. (Deaths from the mining of coal are
>> > > included in proportion to the use of coal in direct
>> > > power production.)
>> > >
>> > > Natural Gas power production resulted in some
>> > > 1200 deaths, of both industry workers and the
>> > > general public, for 85 deaths per terawatt-year.
>> > >
>> > > Nuclear Power resulted in 31 deaths, all of workers,
>> > > for a total of 8 deaths per terawatt-year, or 1%
>> > > of the deaths from "safe" environmentally friendly
>> > > hydroelectric power.
>> > >
>> > > The "other fuel," petroleum, is rarely used for power
>> > > production but largely for transportation. How deadly,
>> > > in these terms, is our transportation power use in
>> > > cars and trucks as compared to the cost in life of
>> > > power production?
>> > >
>> > > The U.S. consumed 0.138 teragallons of gasoline
>> > > on 2009 (at 4.175 watt-years per gallon), with a
>> > > total energy content of a "mere" 0.576 terawatt-years.
>> > > Highway deaths in 2009 were 33,963, which yields
>> > > 58,943 deaths per terawatt-year of power consumed.
>> > >
>> > > Clearly, the use of this power source for transport
>> > > is many orders of magnitude more dangerous than
>> > > the production of electrical power, however it is
>> > > accomplished. Our reaction to this horrendous
>> > > risk is to complain about how much it costs us to
>> > > fill'er up.
>> > >
>> > > Humans are not rational animals.
>> > >
>> > > The reduction in overall life expectancy in the
>> > > U.S. due to nuclear power production is one-third
>> > > of the reduction in life expectancy caused by eating
>> > > 8 ounces. of charcoal-broiled steak per week.
>> > >
>> > > Make mine medium-rare, please.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Sterling K. Webb
>> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > >
>> > > ______________________________________________
>> > > Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
>> > > Meteorite-list mailing list
>> > > Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>> > > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>> > ______________________________________________
>> > Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
>> > Meteorite-list mailing list
>> > Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>> > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>> ______________________________________________
>> Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> ______________________________________________
> Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
Received on Thu 17 Mar 2011 03:52:40 PM PDT