View Single Post
  #54   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
harry harry is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,066
Default Fear of radiation worse than radiation...

On Jun 2, 7:29*am, "Rod Speed" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...









On Jun 1, 9:25 pm, Farmer Giles wrote:
On 01/06/2013 20:57, The Natural Philosopher wrote:


On 01/06/13 20:36, Farmer Giles wrote:
On 01/06/2013 19:13, Nightjar wrote:
On 01/06/2013 18:28, Farmer Giles wrote:
...
What frightening complacency. Even if I accept what you say above -
which I don't - what about earthquakes (which can happen anywhere,
however unlikely it may appear from past history),


Fukushima was hit by an earthquake that was many times more powerful
than it was designed for and suffered no damage from the earthquake
itself. That earthquake was about 30,000 times more severe than
Britain's most powerful recorded earthquake, which knocked the head
off
a waxwork in Madam Tussauds.


terrorist attacks, etc?


If those are going to bother you, you may as well go and live in a
deep
cave in the middle of nowhere.


Whether they bother me, or indeed what happens to me, is of little
consequence. What happens to the world and, more importantly, what
happends to future generations, is not.


You tell me what might have happened if those aeroplanes had been
flown into nuclear power stations instead of the World Trade Centre?


Almost nothing. They are deliberately designed to withstand that.


Really? A large passenger aircraft full of fuel which ignites on impact?


As I said previously, frightening complacency.


I don't wish to be offensive, but it is my firm belief that only madmen
could possibly risk such a nightmare scenario.


These products will need to be stored for hundreds, if not
thousands, of
years. They will be added to and added to, because no-one knows how
to
detoxify them.


We have known how to do that for more than half a century. Storing
them
is cheaper.


Really? I may be wrong, but my understanding is that we are no closer
to detoxifying nuclear wastes now than we were 70 years ago.


It's possible to design against such and eventuality but it adds to
the cost. *Nuclear power is not cheap.


Neither is any other power.

And the first new one (Hinkley) is to be built in the
only place where the UK experienced a tsunami.


And none of the french ones are.


One was closed down due to flooding.