The Adam Project 1080P TГјrkГe
Howdy! This is my first visit to your blog! We are a group of volunteers and starting a new project in acommunity in the same niche. Your blog provided us useful information to work on. You have done a outstanding job!
The Adam Project 1080P Türkçe
Well, only grown-ups should consider nuclear power generation. Our current governing "class" does not provide me with the confidence that the United States can finance, build and soberly manage dangerous public or private projects.
A few years ago a number of science sites reported the development of pelletized nuclear plants. The projected advantage of these plants was that they could not melt down and had virtually no nuclear waste. Where is the latest research on these and why are they not being cosdered to replace the hot core based plantsQualicum Beach BC
No way! We should immediately realize how dangerous nuclear power is and start finding ways to scale down our dependency on it. We should push more then ever to fund large scale alternative energy projects... Giant solar panel and wind farms. There are plenty of space in the US for such projects. Its so upsetting how large industries like the nuclear industry use their money and power to buy influence and control our government.. It is insanity to put so many peoples lives at risk have they learned nothing from the past. Is profit worth putting the planet at risk??How can countries pat themselves on the back about ridding the world of nuclear weapons while at the same time building thousands of nuclear power plants all over the world in major populated cities?? Many of which are close to earthquake fault lines. Chernoble happend without an earthquake. People are also leaving out the fact that they could be targets for terrorism.
Ali, we have no alternative, we have to move forward with Nuclear power. We just need to be very aware of where we place the sites. There should be no live zones, we have thousands of square miles of open land here in America. We need to be smarter in our design and placement of Nuclear Plants. This is an urgent project.
NO NO NO! It's both dangerous and EXPENSIVE. "Cheap" nuclear energy doesn't include the cost of storing deadly materials for many thousands of years (longer than any civilization has remained in existence), and DOES NOT include insuring the many thousands of people for damages they might incur in case of an accident. Insurance isn't required or possible. ALSO, go check the numbers of times "excursions" above the stated limits happen for reactors. (I have, as part of a required student project.) Excursions are allowed for "necessity" and those releases into the environment in the US happen all the time. NO on nuclear energy. Even my professor in Nuclear Engineering was against it.
No! It's both dangerous and expensive. "Cheap" nuclear energy doesn't include the cost of storing deadly materials for many thousands of years (longer than any civilization has remained in existence), and does not include insuring the many thousands of people for damages they might incur in case of an accident. Insurance isn't required or possible. Also, go check the numbers of times "excursions" above the stated limits happen for reactors. (I have, as part of a required student project.) Excursions are allowed for "necessity" and those releases into the environment in the US happen all the time. No on nuclear energy. Even my professor in Nuclear Engineering was against it.
IE large canal hydropower generation.large public works projects are the key to overcoming current power needs. a nuke palnt takes 10 years to build. A large canal on a major river could be done in 4 years. the canal will flodd and drain with water levels.
My husband worked in nine different nuclear power plants. I worked in two. Both of us were in Quality Control/Quality Assurance. New construction and Outages. Both of us adamantly backed this type of power, with frusteration over the lack of trust throughout the nation. TMI did have an incident, although it was handled properly. The newer design of reactor vessels should be safe. I have to be concerned about the government owned sites and the plants that are of an older design though. My concern now that this country has gone through huge natural disasters, like hurricane Katrina, is we as a nation assume it will never happen. I worry and I have seen it, the corruption and "My way or the Highway" attitude. The Nuclear industry does have safety and control programs, but there are still power players, contracts to meet, and huge penalties for lack of completion. (Perfect example is the BP Oil Spill) Nuclear Outages used to last three months, now they are down to a few weeks. As for the three stage back up safety systems in the Japan Reactors, the last would be the battery back-up system. Who would think that the piping systems or the diesel generators would be comprimised. Defaulting power to the reactors to the battery back-up systems, which did not work. Never in a million years. I am very worried. If it can happen in Japan, I feel it could happen here. Especially on the older sites and designs.
Nuclear power has and always will be a very bad idea. I was involved in trying to find a place to store nuclear waste in Nevada but the amount of time required for radioactive isotopes to reach a safe level is so long that no one can predict what the long term effect would be and the project was stopped. There is no SAFE way to handle radioacttive waste and until that can be done I don't think we should be nuclear fuel but on a very limited basis, like for x-rays. Even that has long term disposal risks. I firmly believe we are asking for a major scale problem if nuclear power continues to be used.
Perhaps the greater question about safety of these Nuclear plants, as well as Oil Rigs, is can, or will the contractors or sub-contractors put a less expensive component in the building of the project. We all know it has been done many times, wheather they were told to watch their budget, or they are skimming the cream, it happens.
ali, im a man of meger knowledge to say the least, i've been glued to cnn around the clock literally since the earthquake, i hear truth and lies or cover ups the world is scrambling for the truth and cnn has been covering better than any1 else, bravo literally, we need it as a species.My comment being 1) why is there so much allowable cover up when more than Japan is at risk here, Japan is yes a devastation, yes great sorrow for the Japanese people, but far more is at risk we just dont know2) why as far as nuclear power r we getting side tracked on a 1 lane highway so to speak, nuclear power has more output with less geography needed true more versatile more power over more time as well, down side a 10 mile strip of solar panels or and wind generators dont potentially pollute the next county or close neighboring country when they stop working properly 3) why not argue of a multiple safe guard combination being put reactors zoned to areas of distance from possible cities towns etc. and solar wind combined projects closer to the public 4) why argue it has to be only 1 as if that's the only way, why is the reality of the human element the largest deciding factor, always seems to be who can argue best gets the money pot, the human element is always left to suffer possibly at some point 5) these nuclear reactors in Japan from day 1 have had nothing but salt water pumped on them, if salt water is the last resort for a hazard like now well we've been at the last resort from day 1 and we use words like ok and hope for better, not that bad, if the house next door was burning down and the only way to stop all other from suffering was to bury the burning house then somebody bury it stop throwing useless water on it when everyone is going to suffer, weve been at last resort since day 1 we cant save them come on some body wake up and drop the sand and concrete on this and stop willingly polluting the poor Japanese population and possible everyone else, when human populations are to suffer why does anybody stop and put a dollar cost on human life, where is the humanity in all this useless arguing, someone just do what we know will stop it
As real estate costs in Canada continue to remain high, many homeowners are trying to find outside-the-box housing solutions - such as homes made from recycled shipping containers. Ranging from small"tiny house" constructions featuring one container to larger, more ambitious projects that unite numerous containers that lead to opulent luxury homes, these 20 shipping container homes provide something for every budget and lifestyle. Click here for more { -container-homes-build-free-plans/ -hidalgo.gob.mx/urls/4cC 041b061a72
