ConCen

Nuclear Power Safety has become the Core Story in the Japan Tsunami Crisis

The unfolding of the Earthquake > Tsunami nuclear crisis and how nuclear power has taken centre stage in the reporting. It begs the question as to; whether or not the tsunami was a natural occurrence or man made; with fingers pointing to the US HAARP program is the possibility that, amid the chaos, something other than the tsunami has caused the explosion.

What that could have been is pure speculation at this point but opportunity was ripe, motive was present for the introduction of something else that can make things go boom.

Potential Motives fit for the Spin Cycle

Question is given this opportunity to have an epic fail of a Nuclear Power Disaster in Japan serves this agenda perfectly.

* Anti-US (take them down a notch with the HAARP allegations)
* Anti-Government (in Japan's competence to bring in a new regional/global one)
* Get rid of Unpredictable Nuclear Arms Threats
* Cripple a US proxy economic/military power centre in Japan.
* Global Warming Activist 'evidence'
* One World Global Village Assertion
* Prop up anti-nuclear sentiment to railroad energy options.
* Pure Fear Ratcheting


We can explore the anti-nuclear angle in this thread but as with anything now-a-days there are a lot of dots to connect so I figured it best to take off the blinders first and put it into contextual debate and extend it from there.

Tsunami Triggers: Playing the HAARP and Piping on about Climate Change

Since there has been much talk I can't skip this point over, although I think it has been talked about thoroughly in this thread.

A HAARP triggered event? Even though Japan has basically been a an extension of US empire with 50,000+ troops in place since the end of WWII? There are other ionospheric research facilities 17 by my last count. They are in prime earthquake territory as well. Still it remains a possibility since there really are no nations only factions that use corporate states as they would any other corporate entity to garner power and elicit control of people, land, political will and resources. HAARP has as about much allegiance to the US of A as the Federal Reserve Bank.

As with the HAARPies, that point to man made weather manipulation every time there is a natural disaster, we have another manufactured group that has been barking that it is a direct cause of climate change. So there is also the play to the global warming crowd.

Thorium Nuclear Reactors as a Safe and Sustainable form of Alternative Energy

Nuclear power, particularity Thorium nuclear reactors, have heard hardly a peep in the alternative power considerations. A clear pattern has emerged in a concerted attempt to deny this energy option from 3 Mile Island to Chernobyl to Stuxnet to the current nuclear crisis in Japan. Meanwhile India has been building Thorium reactors for decades.

Thorium Revolt: Mineral to replace uranium as nuclear power source?



Russia Today -- An obscure metal that could energise our world... It's called thorium, it's eco-friendly, and there's lots of it. Many scientists say it could even replace uranium as a nuclear power source. But despite its potential, the metal is yet to gain a foothold in the market. RT's Laura Emmett explains why...

In doing a bit of research on some thorium reactor plants that are already in production... INDIA has put a Nuclear Power Reactor based on thorium into use already since 1993/05/06

Nuclear Power Reactor Details - KAKRAPAR-1

Station Name KAKRAPAR
Owner, Operator NUCLEAR POWER CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.
Type PHWR
Construction Started 1984/12/01
Status Operational
Connected to Electricity Grid 1992/11/24
Net Capacity 202 MWe
Commercial Operation 1993/05/06
Gross Capacity 220 MWe
Long Term Shutdown N/A
Shutdown N/A

Source: http://www.iaea.org/cgi-bin/db.page.pl/p...Alphabetic

They also have an identical station KAKRAPAR 2 in operation since 1995. India has started construction on KAKRAPAR 3 and 4 - 700 MWe pressurised heavy water reactors (PHWRs). The units are slated to start up in 2015 and 2016.

Source: http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NN-Fir...11107.html

To put the power generation in context -- U.S. nuclear power plants have net summer capacities between about 500 and 1300 MWe.

Canadian technology in Candu reactors are being used in production in China ...

In mid-2009, AECL signed agreements with three Chinese entities to develop and demonstrate the use of thorium fuel in the Candu reactors at Qinshan in China. Another mid-2009 agreement, between Areva and Lightbridge Corporation, was for assessing the use of thorium fuel in Areva's EPR, drawing upon earlier research. Thorium can also be used in Generation IV and other advanced nuclear fuel cycle systems.

* Thorium is much more abundant in nature than uranium.
* Thorium can also be used as a nuclear fuel through breeding to fissile uranium-233.

CANDU-type reactors – AECL is researching the thorium fuel cycle application to Enhanced Candu 6 and ACR-1000 reactors with 5% plutonium (reactor grade) plus thorium. In the closed fuel cycle, the driver fuel required for starting off is progressively replaced with recycled U-233, so that on reaching equilibrium 80% of the energy comes from thorium. Fissile drive fuel could be LEU, plutonium, or recycled uranium from LWR. AECL envisages fleets of CANDU reactors with near-self-sufficient equilibrium thorium (SSET) fuel cycles and a few fast breeder reactors to provide plutonium. AECL is also working closely with Third Qinshan Nuclear Power Company (TQNPC), China North Nuclear Fuel Corporation and Nuclear Power Institute of China (NPIC) at Chengdu to develop and demonstrate the use of thorium fuel and to study the commercial and technical feasibility of its full-scale use in Candu units such as at Qinshan.

In Canada (and the US) -- we have the homegrown expertise. Why the hold-up? AECL has more than 50 years experience with thorium-based fuels, including burn-up to 47 GWd/t. Some 25 tests were performed to 1987 in three research reactors and one pre-commercial reactor (NPD), with fuels ranging from ThO2 to that with 30% UO2, though most were with 1-3% UO2, the U being high-enriched.

PROS and CONS

Despite the thorium fuel cycle having a number of attractive features, development has always run into difficulties.

The main attractive features are:

* The possibility of utilising a very abundant resource which has hitherto been of so little interest that it has never been quantified properly.
* The production of power with few long-lived transuranic elements in the waste.
* Reduced radioactive wastes generally.

The problems include:

* The high cost of fuel fabrication, due partly to the high radioactivity of U-233 chemically separated from the irradiated thorium fuel. Separated U-233 is always contaminated with traces of U-232 (69 year half-life but whose daughter products such as thallium-208 are strong gamma emitters with very short half-lives). Although this confers proliferation resistance to the fuel cycle by making U-233 hard to handle and easy to detect, it results in increased costs.
* The similar problems in recycling thorium itself due to highly radioactive Th-228 (an alpha emitter with two-year half life) present.
* Some concern over weapons proliferation risk of U-233 (if it could be separated on its own), although many designs such as the Radkowsky Thorium Reactor address this concern.
* The technical problems (not yet satisfactorily solved) in reprocessing solid fuels. However, with some designs, in particular the molten salt reactor (MSR), these problems are likely to largely disappear.

Thorium-Plutonium Fuel vs mixed uranium-plutonium oxide (MOX)

The thorium-plutonium fuel claims four advantages over the use of mixed uranium-plutonium oxide (MOX) fuel: increased proliferation resistance; compatibility with existing reactors – which will need minimal modification to be able to burn it; the fuel can be made in existing plants in Russia; and a lot more plutonium can be put into a single fuel assembly than with MOX fuel, so that three times as much can be disposed of as when using MOX. The used fuel amounts to about half the volume of MOX and is even less likely to allow recovery of weapons-useable material than used MOX fuel, since less fissile plutonium remains in it. With an estimated 150 tonnes of surplus weapons plutonium in Russia, the thorium-plutonium project would not necessarily cut across existing plans to make MOX fuel.

Source: http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf62.html

Concerns are warranted and justified in most cases but some thorium reactors seem within the realm of meeting all of our criteria for safety, non proliferation, feasibility and even nuclear dis-armament. Radkowsky Thorium Reactors look the best option at first glance if Pu can be acquired effectively

We'll need to consider some more science before proceeding with Thorium reactor rollout en masse. Here's a starter paper on one of the many processes that are being researched and developed today ..
http://cavendishscience.org/bks/nuc/thrupdat.htm

In addressing health, powdered thorium metal is pyrophoric and will often ignite spontaneously in air. Natural thorium decays very slowly compared to many other radioactive materials, and the alpha radiation emitted cannot penetrate human skin meaning owning and handling small amounts of thorium, such as a gas mantle, is considered safe. Exposure to an aerosol of thorium can lead to increased risk of cancers of the lung, pancreas and blood, as lungs and other internal organs can be penetrated by alpha radiation. Exposure to thorium internally leads to increased risk of liver diseases.
~WIKI http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium#Dan...ical_roles

Media Spin and the Global Disaster Hype

Once the news hit one of the first stories was about the nuclear power plants even though everything appeared to be running relatively smoothly. It soon proved that Japan's nuclear power plants would be a focal point in this tragedy.

The media hype has been making this out to be a global disaster by plotting fallout maps of the Fukushima explosion. (h/t to yeti) Also the initial tsunami wave mapping made it out to be a global crisis that was heavily exaggerated.

6 foot waves in Hawaii? Isn't that relatively normal for the surfing capital of the world? A couple of flipped boats on the US Coastline?

It's tragic but fairly isolated and regional in nature no matter how the media is trying to spin it.

I'm not pro-nuclear all around but there are some viable alternatives among the multitude of nuclear energy schemes that bear consideration. Thorium nuclear reactors (links to a couple of articles/comments from a ways back) being at the forefront of those I've looked into.

Nuclear Energy to Nuclear Weapons

Anti-nuclear is a bit all encompassing for me but in it's current state maybe thorium reactor should be addressed as well. Using wide swaths may consequentially ban viable and safe forms of energy. Thorium reactors look to be a promising alternative to the current make-up of nuclear energy technologies on the table. Transmission and storage issues also need to be addressed fully as we lose a lot of power due to transmission of energy.

Market forces are being manipulated and are heavily subsidized and the marketing via science is creating a leveraged playing field for certain technologies and their implementation. Energy should be based on merit alone based on a balanced combination of efficiency (cost, output, labour, oversight, maintenance, installation ..), reliability, infrastructure requirements, distribution, and ecological / human health impact.

On a military standpoint we have a lot of weaponry that needs to be curtailed and maybe spearhead an agreement on coming to a moratorium on some development so they can be further researched before proliferation. Russian magnetic technology is far ahead of western development (since Operation Paperclip and now in the 5th generation of development) and is reportedly being used in military applications that have yet to render their full application. This technology can also be used in power generation.

There is also the issue of weather weaponry which is banned under UN treaty but there are suspicions that they are being used in operations. Cloud seeding technology is admittedly used in Vietnam and is currently used in Alberta to create snow in ski resorts. HAARP (and the ~17 other stations that we know of ) is speculation at this time but there is evidence that heating the ionosphere could be applied as a weather weapon. Directed at the ground RF could potentially trigger earthquakes.

A comprehensive non-proliferation of weaponry strategy needs to be formulated but that should be separate from nuclear power generation. It's framed as a hop and a skip away from nuclear weaponry but from what I've come across it's more of a giant leap or at least a triple jump.

More Facts Please..

Earthquake disaster testing on the affected Japanese nuclear power reactor facilities passed with flying colours but they were not tested for their threshold for withstanding tsunamis. I'm not saying it wasn't the tsunami but I'd like to present some thoughts on the unquestioning direct correlation between tsunami and the nuclear power station crisis in Japan.

The way the Japanese nuclear explosion has been framed and fed to us seems to be common sense but a closer look may bring into question the causal effect. I'll continue on looking into this alternative retelling of the story until I'm satisfied. Best to do it before the cement has dried. That task falls on us and any tidbits ya'll can dig up and contribute would be valuable and appreciated in piecing this puzzle together.


Condolences go out to the suffering Japanese and those whose lives were tragically cut short. Like most of us, I wish I could do more for them but we have battles of our own to apply ourselves more directly.

"Trusted" Media Puppets in the fake alt-media Alex Jones (video) and Natural News a.k.a. Truth Publishing International, LTD. (article with plenty of links to buy iodine supplements) are beaking off and falling right in line with mainstream media circus, but worse. They mention Chernobyl, Worse than a terrorist attack, lying government cover-ups, much worse than mainstream news is reporting and the dirty bomb.

Alex starts of his video with "I'm not against Nuclear Power, I never have been" and then goes on to name a half dozen countries that he says lie about nuclear power facilities, which may very well be true - but only to a point. Jones is dripping with spin but I'm preaching to the choir on this one, well I hope I am.

Mike Adams, the Health Ranger is even worse. He cites a secret unnamed insider contact from Tokyo. But he does shed a bit of light between the lines in quoting his source.

"The spent fuel bundles should have been relocated away from the reactor core a long, long time ago. Given the earthquake realities of Japan, these reactor building were basically dirty bombs waiting to be set off by a [natural] disaster."

So if this is true, shall we learn from these mistakes, was this by design waiting for this to happen, is it really as bad as they say it is in the dramatic description of fire and nuclear fallout?

What is absent from the debate is the positives of certain implementations of Nuclear Power and proper storage and/or disposal of nuclear waste (space elevator, recycling nuclear waste ..) which would cost far less than any of the Green alternatives (and some fallacies) such as Carbon Capture and Storage, Clean Coal, Biomass, Geo-Engineering, The Smart Grid, Algae Fuel, Windmills Everywhere, Solar Farms (especially in Canadian Winters), Smart Grids, Electric Cars + Infrastructure and Carbon Dioxide Cap and Tax Swindles.

Nuclear energy may not be solution; but in the absence of oil for various reasons -- real and imagined, geopolitical and corporately manufactured, green and 'green' it's one of the only ponies left in the shed to euthanize for the new energy cartels.

With energy being set to form the backing for the new world currency, the stakes have never been higher. All the chips are on the table.

I'm also a fan of geothermal but much of that momentum has been nixed because it's been said by some cherry picked science that it could cause earthquakes.

It seems to be putting the sway on public by playing on their empathy during this tragedy. Will nuclear energy be on this decreed shortlist of alternative energy options any longer? Time will tell soon enough.

One important point to consider would be that the government power already exists in the United States to shut down nuclear facilities anywhere near water that connects in any way shape or form citing the realm of potential for a hurricane or tsunami or a bloody asteroid for that matter with the recent formation of the National Ocean Council (NOC) which was done by yet another Barack Obama Executive Order on July 19, 2010.

Don't think they will - well one oil eruption that mysteriously came and went "forced" an indefinite moratorium on one of the biggest oil reserves on the planet in the Gulf of Mexico.

Quote:Safe nuclear does exist, and China is leading the way with thorium
by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
20 Mar 2011

A few weeks before the tsunami struck Fukushima’s uranium reactors and shattered public faith in nuclear power, China revealed that it was launching a rival technology to build a safer, cleaner, and ultimately cheaper network of reactors based on thorium.

Digg: http://digg.com/news/science/safe_nuclea...th_thorium
Full Article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comme...orium.html

Quote:Thorium catches world's eye post Japanese nuke disaster
Mar 21, 2011

India is considered as the world leader in thorium. The Kakrapar-1 reactor located near Surat in Gujarat is the world's first reactor which uses thorium than depleted uranium for vital power generation. Compated to uranium, thorium has less fissile. The nuclear physicists are now looking at thorium as the safer model.

Ian Hore-Lacy from World Nuclear Association said, "India is the only country in the world that develops thorium fuel cycle. The expertise in India is world class and it is applied very rigorously to the safety of nuclear plants in India."

Digg: http://digg.com/news/technology/thorium_...e_disaster
Full Story: http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/cnbc-tv...30566.html

It seems that India has 25% of the world's thorium reserves. Partly attributed to the fact they have been looking for it. The article fails to mention that Canada, US, Australia all have plenty too.

A 300 MW prototype of a thorium-based Advanced Heavy Water Reactor (AHWR) is planned for debut in India this year.

Reserves are speculative like with oil but here's those numbers anyways from the wiki - They haven't been updated for a year now though but it gives a rough idea as to the known national distribution of thorium by nation state.



Greenpeace jumped all over this one in calling for a nuclear energy moratorium and an immediate stoppage to all GE reactors that were of the same make as the one installed at the Fukushima nuclear plant in Japan.

Obama has been pretty cryptic in saying through a buffered proxy that nuclear energy 'remains a part of the President's overall energy plan', despite new concerns about its safety, a White House spokesman said. Hardly reassuring.

Safe is good and prudent but let's not neuter our power generation capabilities all at once now here especially with the energy crisis be it manufactured by design or not.

Oh, yes! Let's build us some thousands of those. Yesss, my preciousss...

You sellin'?

There are different flavours of thorium reactors. I'd hardly advocate all of them.

It seems that India is making a push to market its technology with a bit of marketing coming from China as well but Canada, Australia and the US are just as competent at building thorium based nuclear energy systems.

We need to keep the know-how and technology in house if we would care to proceed with thorium reactors.

In the bigger scheme of things Nuclear would be further down my list but it's not something to be ignored and should be used where it fits. Building one on a quadruple fault line is irresponsible (although it was tested for earthquakes it wasn't for a tsunami) but unfortunately no-one piped up before this disaster.

I'd be more concerned about nuclear arms testing (underground, undersea and formerly atmospheric) than nuclear power generation in terms of radiation from nuclear sources.

We can have ecologically responsible, cost effective, safe and sustainable alternatives in Geothermal and Large scale tidal where appropriate. Magnetic is a possibility. The Bedini Monopole Energizer looks like an interesting alternative power source. Maybe hydrogen too but I haven't explored that option too much. It depends where these solutions are installed and how they are distributed and administered. We need to take into account energy needs, expansion, environmental impact, safety, ownership, delivery, resources, technology, cost, education and manpower in each area/community to fully vet these alternatives before publicly funding, regulating and ultimate proceeding with each one for each demographic region.

Solar is 10-20 years off but could get there someday but not now. Wind power has proven unreliable and enormously expensive to date. Electric Vehicles are a huge scam as it is right now.

Transmission schemes also need to be revisited due to EM pollution, line loss and general inefficiency. The 'smart' grid does not address these issues.

When they tell you the levels are at 1100 in Japan by the nuclear energy plants, which is a lethal dose of radiation, those are the spikes.

The reports that the fallout cloud will reach the US and Europe is true .. but at harmless levels. Problem is that it is cumulative. In the bigger scheme of thing is this nuclear fallout from the Japan reactors is negligible. It's no more harmful than radiation from cell phones, wireless internet, microwave ovens, power lines, DECT (cordless) phones, unscrubbed coal processing and even naturally occurring uranium, radon and thorium. There are other effects from the frequencies emitted.

Plutonium is a man made element (who says alchemy isn't possible or real). Certain implementations of thorium reactors do not use any plutonium and are cooled by air alone.

Cool thing about Nuclear is that it can be recycled. Many people don't tend to know that and need to be informed to make a decision with a full deck as opposed to this stacked one we're being dealt on the MSM and alt-media 'facts'.

Why suppress nuclear though? Nuclear is too easy to implement now and cannot be controlled as easily. Easier than oil or gas or coal or even controlled tidal .. on a large scale that is.

On storage and disposal; .. did they didn't have to store 40 years of waste there, onsite? Recycling or a space elevator (I'm sure we could do it if we tried) for disposal. Many nuclear implementations are insane though such as MOX or CANDU reactors. I'd relate it to stupid schemes like fracturing or clear cut drilling for oil and gas.

We can do much better but no need to throw away this technology in Nuclear all across the board with the heavy water. Nuclear energy has been on the brink of solving this manufactured energy crisis and every time is it about to explode on the market it seems that a huge disaster happens.

Whether that disaster was caused by the tsunami or HAARP or some bomb or was simply set up to fail or not is irrelevant it's how we react and we're obviously being played into polarized general corners on this one. Hopefully we can see past that here and talk to our friends and communities about it knowing this now.

(03-22-2011 04:34 PM)FastTadpole Wrote: [ -> ]The reports that the fallout cloud will reach the US and Europe is true .. but at harmless levels.

You don't know that. Europe and Russia are still having problems from Chernobyl and will have for a very long time in the future. We haven't seen the consequences of Fukushima on a global scale and it will take a year or two until we have the bigger picture.

Quote:Why suppress nuclear though?

Who is suppressing it? Who are these anti-nuclear ninjas that planted bombs in Fukushima (or whatever your idea was)? Do you know how much tax money have gone into nuclear power? Massive amounts that you and I pay, just to get radiated, nice deal.

Quote:Nuclear energy has been on the brink of solving this manufactured energy crisis and every time is it about to explode on the market it seems that a huge disaster happens.

That's because it can never be made 100% safe, and combining that with the massive consequences when it fails I am very happy the huge disaster happened before the market exploded.

Quote:Whether that disaster was caused by the tsunami or HAARP or some bomb or was simply set up to fail or not is irrelevant it's how we react and we're obviously being played into polarized general corners on this one.

You maybe think I am polarized, but considering if we killed nuclear power today we would still have to invest massive amounts of money, life and time just to clear up all the spent fuel, radioactive plants, disaster sites and radiation poisoning, for a very long time, like forever, so I'm not polarized, I'll live with this radiation hazard for all my life and the generations after me will to.

We Did A Big Poo In Our Pants, And Now It's Time To Clean Up!

Quote:You don't know that.

It's not Chernobyl no matter how the media wants to make it seem like it is. Have you heard the word meltdown yet. The high radiation levels were limited to ~50 square miles in that area.

Quote:Do you know how much tax money have gone into nuclear power?

Canada spent $10-18 Billion to hire private firms in the past decade for installation and maintenance. Like computers and cell phones these were not made as they could have been and have an expiry date. I'm also calling for a better way. As for other countries I can't say ask your provincial/state/federal government - start with the budget or energy department.

Quote:100% safe

No such thing as 100% safe. Bananas aren't 100% safe since you can slip on the peel. But I know what you're saying it's a risk benefit that should be examined. Like I said there are more appropriate forms of energy but nuclear is here and is relatively clean and viable now. It's worth exploring. I feel I am repeating myself but hopefully that's more clear now.

Quote:Clean it up

I'm not versed in nuclear cleanup. Is that even possible? I think the damage is done short of a potential meltdown. Share what you know about nuclear cleanup and I'd be happy to spread the word.

The past generation dropped the ball on nuclear .. that much is evident and it appears to be at a crossroads it just depends which technology

.. and it's the people that are being massaged to become polarized by the fake right/left paradigm dynamic and along party lines as I see it already shaping in that controlled spectrum of debate. I was referring to that aspect of the hive mind not you personally.

(03-22-2011 05:52 PM)FastTadpole Wrote: [ -> ]nuclear is here and is relatively clean and viable now.

Look into uranium mining and enriching and take note of the costs, the pollution, the energy cost, the damage to nature and so on. I guess it's not even economical to begin with.

Quote:I'm not versed in nuclear cleanup. Is that even possible? I think the damage is done short of a potential meltdown.

I wasn't just talking about this accident. You have all the accumulated spent fuel, how many tons?, that have to be stored for 100.000 years. And so on. There's already massive damage been done 1000s of years into the future. It's madness to continue I tell you. If you think it's so great why don't you go to Chernobyl and help cement that growing monster of coffin or to Fukushima and spray some water with a garden hose on a core risking to go ballistic.

Quote:.. and it's the people that are being massaged to become polarized by the fake right/left paradigm dynamic and along party lines as I see it already shaping in that controlled spectrum of debate. I was referring to that aspect of the hive mind not you personally.

I don't care about the politics anymore. I am talking the real world here, real world consequences so far into the future you can't even understand. Have you seen Into Eternity? The problem of storing spent fuel is an unfathomable problem, and it's growing everyday, becoming bigger and bigger, more and more expensive into the future.

What hides in snow comes out in thaw.

nuclear is just another way to centralise power and energy to a few while making everyone else pay. it doesn't stop pollution on a local level. Its dangerous when it goes horribly wrong. The real gain will always be when WE get our personal power out of the control of these dicks. personal power folks. its the way forward.

(03-23-2011 12:32 AM)rsol Wrote: [ -> ]personal power folks. its the way forward.

Yes, it seems essential to stop the NWO. Nuclear power is the dark force that the NWO are feeding from. It's all about energy.

It's like in the book 1984, where war is used to spend resources to hinder a class-less society. I guess nuclear power costs more than it gives to humanity, on all levels.

I respect the points brought up in this thread whether they have scientific, intuitive, ecological consciousnesses and/or humanitarian motive. I believe you believe what you are saying.

I deal with facts and want to present as wide an array of options as possible and I see potential in the nuclear option although it is not my primary pitch for an alternative energy solution in its current state.

I have laid out real world examples which are exemplified in practice, some of which have been operational for more than 15 years. The technology is here. This does not discount the potential and evident destruction, coverup and scams that have taken place in the past.

Nuclear technology has existed since the late 1800s. Since then it has evolved, been abused, been capitalized on and has even had a fair share of success stories.

Personal power generation is admirable; and if we had a society that was allocated enough resources financial and natural to embark up on such ventures that would be the best solution. In reality, we're in a world of cities and states that rely on distribution in food, water, natural resources and energy. That distribution needs to be shipped in given this dynamic of concentrated pockets of humanity.

Until we change this city living dynamic we are reliant on a large contingent of centralized systems (good point rsol). That applies across all of our needs a both real and perceived as it is pitched by culture and marketing to rampant consumerism.

There is an intermittent need to be filled and it can be by harnessing the power of the atom - in whole or in part.

The oil and gas tap is being cut off to bring the American empire to its knees. Combine that with the manufactured financial, food and water shortage and you have all the ingredients for the implosion of the society that has propped up these needs as paramount.

There is plenty of fodder to pounce upon in the realm of nuclear power but it's been cherry-picked and pounced upon by films like Eternity and pounced upon without letting the other end of the spectrum have a fair shake in presenting their viewpoint.

I'll repeat a few points from above so they can be addressed directly:

Quote:CANDU-type reactors – AECL is researching the thorium fuel cycle application to Enhanced Candu 6 and ACR-1000 reactors with 5% plutonium (reactor grade) plus thorium. In the closed fuel cycle, the driver fuel required for starting off is progressively replaced with recycled U-233, so that on reaching equilibrium 80% of the energy comes from thorium. Fissile drive fuel could be LEU, plutonium, or recycled uranium from LWR. AECL envisages fleets of CANDU reactors with near-self-sufficient equilibrium thorium (SSET) fuel cycles and a few fast breeder reactors to provide plutonium.

I still feel that any nuclear power including thorium requires further investigation but it's in the 4th generation -- the Japan nuclear reactors are 2nd generation systems.

No we shouldn't proceed with them en-masse but we should continue to research the alternative as it has matured since the GE installation. This venture should be strategically considered provided the ideal geography and a lack of alternative power for large concentrations of human populations and/or industrial processes that require the power where other options are not available.

For Japan I'd recommend utilizing geothermal and tidal power options. They're also looking into a focusing solar via satellite based mirror system to bring the power of the sun to a power conversion station.

Nuclear power essentially is a complex way to boil water in harnessing the power of the atom. We've paid a large penance for exploring this route to date but the same could be said for a lot of technologies that I could list off until I turn blue. We're no longer in unknown territory on nuclear power.

I'm trying to lay the chips on the table to see what we have to work with and discern the potential of where we could be headed while trying to ignore the media circus that surrounds the issue. I only encourage the presentation of facts that either, that's the point of this discussion thread.

Thanks for the contributions to date. I welcome more. Bring it so we can fully dissect this option.

Invent The Space Elevator And
Fire Waste Into the Sun

I am serious.

Using arable land to create biofuel
raises food prices thereby starves
those who can't afford food.

And, in most cases, windpower,
geothermal and most other non
petro/carbon means (including
biofuel) violates the principle of
Net Yield

(03-23-2011 09:20 AM)FastTadpole Wrote: [ -> ]I respect the points brought up in this thread whether they have scientific, intuitive, ecological consciousnesses and/or humanitarian motive. I believe you believe what you are saying.

Thank you. This thread is becoming too emotional for me. A whole country is being devastated, and we haven't seen the end yet, with black plumes, neutron beams, radioactive drinkingwater etc. etc.

So I will leave it to you to continue to push radiation to the people, while I pray none of the meltdowns get active.

curious how the take has been in this thread.....

Hub who is anti nuke has plenty of valid points and as Nobel as tad is to suggest a newer safer method... i have to side with rsol, he's the closest to the right answer, it's about getting the free energy, we don't need to have massive energy making machines if most homes are self sufficient, and there by managing there own wastes. in the cities its much harder to do this as you are the grid so unplugging is not an option, but power can be made by water, by hydrogen, i mean the tech is there but suppressed.

why did japan get what it's got and getting... it might be natural as in not done by the hands of men, but I'm still undecided if this was triggered or natural, if it was triggered it could be for a multitude of reasons and those who think the tech doesn't exist... Riiiiiightttttttt (a la Dr Evil). We need to see what will be and hopefully enough of those who have the knowledge survive the great cull. Japan's reactors feed several purposes of the left hand keeping folks plenty distracted, but it also opens folks eyes to the dangers of the Nuker facilities and so i would not be surprised if many are brought off line for re evaluation in the next few months... Why... so when it gets much worse the whole planet is not scrubbed with fall out from reactors melting down as there in there bunkers. no point in surviving if you can't go out as the whole world is radioactive. no this gives them the sneaky way of further preparing in front of everyone...

... like the MSM is now speaking of a potential second sun for several months from a "far" distant star blowing up..... Japan is a sign of the times, and if it does sink before cali... Well folks stay safe... and keep a look out like i posted earlier in another thread it will be interesting to see if the NW usa gets there's due any day, and We in the know all know of yellowstone... should be an interesting month of the Fool.

The second half of Tonight's Coast to Coast AM Show
looks very interesting. Sterling Allan will be speaking
on Free Energy Hope in a Chaotic World

I just discovered his website and will spending a fair
bit of time on the site because it is clearinghouse on
cheap, clean and free energy.