3 votes

Gundersen: “Essentially Entire Plant Has a Gamma Ray Haze Over It..."

Its called "Gamma Shine"... Work won't be possible by humans much longer if it isn't already.
New: Gamma Haze -- "There’s this phenomenon called Bremsstrahlung and the decay of radioactive material in those tanks is releasing x-rays in very high quantities off site. “Essentially entire plant has a gamma ray haze over it… a haze of radioactive particles” — Tepco: It’s impossible to stop, using more shielding won’t help.
'War' on a Budget -- "The magnitude of this problem is huge. It’s as if we – the Japanese should be fighting this as if it were a war. And you don’t fight a war on a budget. And I think that’s what’s happening in Fukushima. The Japanese government isn’t willing to give Tokyo Electric any more money, and Tokyo Electric then is trying to decontaminate the site on a budget that’s not big enough."

►►Current Risk Summary @ 11:00




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

midwest

I'm originally from northern Indiana. It rains most of the spring and summer. So that includes Michigan Ohio, and Illinois. I have tried solar to supplement my ac usage in the summer. Problem is clouda and rain.

And it is no myth about solar panels and snow. I'm sorry but you're aren't going to find to many people who are going to climb up on the roof in the dead of winter to clear their solar panels from the late night lake effect snow that dumped 2-3 feet the night before.

Not happening. Solar does not work in the Midwest, at least not next to a giant fresh water lake that has its own weather system.

I assume you're moving the topic from the bottom of the page up

You make the case against PV solar panels yet you were just encouraged to look at non-PV solar thermal electric.

"It's a complete myth that solar isn't good for northern states. That is only true for solar PV but there are other types of solar that take advantage of having clear sun AND colder ambient temps. Think solar thermal electric. These operate from the difference of two temps. The sun gets magnified for the hot one and the air or ground temps are used for a lower baseline than in a desert. This increases efficiency, even from thermal energy that's been stored for a month.

Where solar doesn't work so well is not the cold areas but the rainy ones like the PNW. "

I'm not sure of your point. Please clarify.

If this was really a big disaster, it WOULD be a war mobilisatio

If this was really a big disaster, it WOULD be a war-like mobilisation of global resources to solve this problem, instead of just a trickle of occasional half-hearted efforts by a quasi-private firm.

"Cowards & idiots can come along for the ride but they gotta sit in the back seat!"

If it were a big disaster there would be a big cover-up

GE down't want anyone to know how dangerous their nuclear systems are.

Besides being unprofitable requiring government subsidies, their equipment kills people and it can't be turned off.

Free includes debt-free!

One

7.0+ earthquake in this volatile coast renders your argument moot.
It IS a war..
with time. There IS no mobilization.
tick tock.
Simply listen for 3 minutes @ 11:00

Energy

How I wish that a lot more research was going into Thorium Liquid Salt Reactors. Clean, Safe, and no long term radiation problems. Yet we'll keep fissioning Uranium, and Plutonium because some people don't want to lose money in an outdated model of energy production.

I hope Bitcoins go to 1M a piece. I'll sponsor my own development of Thorium energy production and I'll patent none of it. To hell with this closed minded, closed source crap.

Transmutation of elements involves radioactive processes.

Gasoline engines are 20% efficient.

Conventional nuclear reactors are 33% efficient minus the costs of running the cooling systems.

Diesel-Steam binary cycles up to 60% efficient.

GE sells binary cycle turbines and advertise 57% inefficiencies.

I would invest in 90 mpg technology and making electricity generating furnaces.

Free includes debt-free!

What?

Are you saying that the only problems that can exist (and threaten the general population) are dirty, unsafe and radiation?

You forget about politics, greed, threats and good old incompetence. Those can affect every single technology there is, be it energy or communication or other.

If you're so focused on solving the energy problems you should do more research. Thorium with liquid salt is so far from a solution. There are high temperature problems that can't be solved yet. Things corrode faster at higher temps. There are heat dissipation issues. There are even energy centralization issues that can't be dealt with yet. (Even though that's more of a political football.) Each of these takes an ideally low cost and turns it into higher cost than fission.

But the largest problem with them is that they scale better to larger systems than smaller. This compounds the other problems, including the monopoly issue. While it could be scaled down to a city block or even one home, the cost of monitoring and securing it would outweigh the benefits. In short, if you have other viable alternatives, why play the game at all?

Yes I know

But the research and development money is being spent to try and improve upon conventional uranium fission. Which requires enrichment before it even goes into a reactor. Thorium requires no such enrichment.

The problems with conventional nuclear energy were resolved by research and development. Outside of the 5,000-10,000 year old hazardous nuclear waste issue which as of late just consist of us just burying the shit in a deep salt cavern.

I agree energy centralization is a big issue. I recognize it whenever the power goes out for apparently no reason. My hope is that one day we reach a point where a house can be energy independent and not solely rely on solar and deep cycle batteries. Solar doesn't work well for those in the northern states, especially the midwest where they are covered in snow for 6 months out of the year.

So until we can get a energy source that can be scaled down to that level centralization is still all that we have. I live within 10 miles of 3 nuclear power plants. Yeah the local electricity producer always puts on commercials how safe it is because "we live here too", they never really detail where they dump the spent nuclear fuel thought. I'd like to see that video. lol. On the other hand the Thorium cycle can fully recycle actinide wastes and only emit fission product wastes, and after a few hundred years, the waste from a thorium reactor can be less toxic than the uranium ore that would have been used to produce low enriched uranium fuel for a light water reactor of the same power.

It's a viable alternative IF the R&D money was actually spent into solving some of the issues you listed.

Still, why play at all?

You say that conventional nuclear's problems were solved with lots of money but they weren't. Only 'certain' problems were and others were disregarded. ..hence the issues we have today.

The same is and will happening with thorium. The tech problems are not solved (high temp, non-corrosive equipment) and the rest are being ignored. Same goes for the centralization.

Do you really want another era of a few at the top controlling entire industries down to the bottom? How's that been working for any industry (the Fed???) so far?

You suggest that you desire an energy source that can be scaled down, yet you don't recognize that we already have it. It's a complete myth that solar isn't good for northern states. That is only true for solar PV but there are other types of solar that take advantage of having clear sun AND colder ambient temps. Think solar thermal electric. These operate from the difference of two temps. The sun gets magnified for the hot one and the air or ground temps are used for a lower baseline than in a desert. This increases efficiency, even from thermal energy that's been stored for a month.

Where solar doesn't work so well is not the cold areas but the rainy ones like the PNW. But those areas have geothermal, wind and tidal power. If people would stop promoting nuclear and start taking fossil fuels' problems seriously, the renewable revolution could happen in 2 years flat. Otherwise, it's going to remain on its track of 50 years after 1980. We just have to stop compromising.

No matter the advancements, we're still just boiling water

No matter the advancements in nuclear technology, such as ITER's fusion reactor or thorium liquid sodium cooled fission reactors, we're still just boiling water like F'ing Robert Fulton did 200 years ago. As far as that's concerned, we as a civilisation have made NO progress on the energy front since Napoleon's time.

I warrant the same money put into reactors can be put into geothermal. Drill a bunch of parallel tubes several miles into the lower crust, and tap the internal heat energy of the earth to boil water. No nuclear waste, and the heat is free.

Or go totally high end with aneutronic fusion of boron and hydrogen so as to collect direct current from a reaction, instead of this lame nineteenth century boiling water bullcrap.

"Cowards & idiots can come along for the ride but they gotta sit in the back seat!"

Yes, no more boiling water BS!

I agree with your assessment that we've made no progress since we learned to harness boiled water's power. Still, I wonder why you continue to promote it?

You suggest geothermal... to boil water. (...and from public money?) Why not use a heat engine directly instead of transitioning through the water medium? And let's dump the geothermal too. Not that it's not good but that it's so much work and environmental destruction compared to solar's higher potential on both fronts.

If you want massive, reliable (on call) heat from solar, you just have to run it though a thermal storage system first. Since solar has no 'exhaust', there's no loss in any conversion - only delays. Concentrate the sun on a massive rock (sic) and wait for it to get hot. Thermally couple the rock to a Stirling engine and you've got both dependability and storage. If you're worried about losing sun for 2 days, make it big enough to store 3 day's energy. 10 days > 11 days... you get the point. Either way it's just a matter of 'the energy always reaches the engine', just delayed by your storage time. But the kicker is that the heat cycle (Carnot efficiency) can be chosen as high as desired by the magnification level of the sunlight vs. the insulation. (See stasis temperature) Many uses can be found for the waste heat from the cold side as well, since it also can be tailored to any desired temperature.

Once that is realized and utilized, we can see massive progress to the point that energy concerns are simply forgotten. On all terrestrial, oceanic and space fronts.

I hadn't heard of aneutronic fusion before. It's an interesting concept but still seems fraught with technical problems. In high concentration energy systems, that usually translates to ultra high costs but I'll hold any judgement for now.

Will the planet survive humanity

The depopulation agenda of the Rothschild NWO.

sovereign