CNN An 8.8-magnitude earthquake has struck Japan

[Sbane]

Alarmist much Beet and jmfsct?

I'm simply relaying my training when I worked in nuke power plants in '94-95...which is probably more training than sum total of the rest of you yahoos, aside from muon.

the only action I have taken is to inform my wife back in Houston to keep the Excursion's fuel tank at least 3/4 full for the next week until this plays out

You would be better received if you actually gave some confirmation this supposed effects of a meltdown. I'm sorry, but your claims simply do not seem plausible

 But I am still a HUGE proponent of nuclear power.  The plant in question is old and the newer designs would not have had this problem.

Could you explain why?

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

The argument is of course that this is the oldest nuclear plant in Japan...

The level of radiation is dropping markedly, a friend of mine who is actually a nuclear scientist said the threat to anywhere outside of Japan is virtually nil (notwithstanding a catastrophic meltdown, which has not happened).

I'm not against nuclear power, but building nuclear plants near the coast... in Japan is not exactly a wise idea.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I'm not against nuclear power, but building nuclear plants near the coast... in Japan is not exactly a wise idea.

They're often (usually?) near the coast for cooling.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I'm not against nuclear power, but building nuclear plants near the coast... in Japan is not exactly a wise idea.

They're often (usually?) near the coast for cooling.

That's true, but many are built at sea-level, which I've always thought is a mistake.

[J. J.]

Another tsunami warning for NE Japan. - - Fox

[J. J.]

Explosion in second Fukushima reactor!  CNN

[J. J.]

Another tsunami warning for NE Japan. - - Fox

Confirmed by CNN.  The Japanese Army spotted 3 meter waves at sea.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

MSNBC: "xplosion heard at Fukushima Dai-ichi reactor in northern Japan"

[J. J.]

Explosion in second Fukushima reactor!  CNN

Thought to be a hydrogen explosion, but #1 was seen to be smoking.

[J. J.]

Another tsunami warning for NE Japan. - - Fox

Confirmed by CNN.  The Japanese Army spotted 3 meter waves at sea.

CNN saying wave has dissipated.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Beet, your asteroid argument is just ridiculous.  The chances of an asteroid hit to a nuclear plant are infantesimal.

As for other alternatives... I'm all for having more wind farms and solar plants (preferably less coal).

As for nuclear power plants... they can be shut down.

[Beet]

Beet, your asteroid argument is just ridiculous.  The chances of an asteroid hit to a nuclear plant are infantesimal.

As for other alternatives... I'm all for having more wind farms and solar plants (preferably less coal).

As for nuclear power plants... they can be shut down.

The Fukushima plants are shut down. You should call the Japanese government and tell them they have no problem. I'm sure they'd be elated to hear the news.

[J. J.]

Beet, your asteroid argument is just ridiculous.  The chances of an asteroid hit to a nuclear plant are infantesimal.

As for other alternatives... I'm all for having more wind farms and solar plants (preferably less coal).

As for nuclear power plants... they can be shut down.

More people will die from the tsunami (or a meteor strike) than from a meltdown.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

FOX News: Confirmed to be a hydrogen explosion

[J. J.]

Miyagi prefecture: 2,000 dead bodies discovered this morning.

[Sam Spade]

Folks, Chernobyl is about as bad as your going to get from a nuclear plant disaster.  The chances of this one being Chernobyl-scale is pretty close to nil for a number of reasons (first of all the Soviets did not care about anyone, period), so imagine what are the odds of it being worse.

I still wouldn't want to be within 100 miles of these plants (or downwind a bit further).  Nor do I believe anything the Japs say (yet again).

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Beet, your asteroid argument is just ridiculous.  The chances of an asteroid hit to a nuclear plant are infantesimal.

As for other alternatives... I'm all for having more wind farms and solar plants (preferably less coal).

As for nuclear power plants... they can be shut down.

The Fukushima plants are shut down. You should call the Japanese government and tell them they have no problem. I'm sure they'd be elated to hear the news.

Those were shut down after they lost power, under emergency procedures, hardly ideal.  With warning time of even up to a day, you could easily bring the reaction under control and to shutdown stage (if not even cold shutdown stage with that much lead time).

[J. J.]

Folks, Chernobyl is about as bad as your going to get from a nuclear plant disaster.  The chances of this one being Chernobyl-scale is pretty close to nil for a number of reasons (first of all the Soviets did not care about anyone, period), so imagine what are the odds of it being worse.

I still wouldn't want to be within 100 miles of these plants (or downwind a bit further).  Nor do I believe anything the Japs say (yet again).

Chernobyl didn't have a containment vessel.

[Beet]

Beet, your asteroid argument is just ridiculous.  The chances of an asteroid hit to a nuclear plant are infantesimal.

As for other alternatives... I'm all for having more wind farms and solar plants (preferably less coal).

As for nuclear power plants... they can be shut down.

The Fukushima plants are shut down. You should call the Japanese government and tell them they have no problem. I'm sure they'd be elated to hear the news.

Those were shut down after they lost power, under emergency procedures, hardly ideal.  With warning time of even up to a day, you could easily bring the reaction under control and to shutdown stage (if not even cold shutdown stage with that much lead time).

A warning time of a day is not guaranteed for any disaster. With a warning time of a day, 9/11 could have been prevented too. Besides, 24 hours isn't sufficient. The reactors need at least 72 hours to cool.

[J. J.]

Beet, your asteroid argument is just ridiculous.  The chances of an asteroid hit to a nuclear plant are infantesimal.

As for other alternatives... I'm all for having more wind farms and solar plants (preferably less coal).

As for nuclear power plants... they can be shut down.

The Fukushima plants are shut down. You should call the Japanese government and tell them they have no problem. I'm sure they'd be elated to hear the news.

Those were shut down after they lost power, under emergency procedures, hardly ideal.  With warning time of even up to a day, you could easily bring the reaction under control and to shutdown stage (if not even cold shutdown stage with that much lead time).

A warning time of a day is not guaranteed for any disaster. With a warning time of a day, 9/11 could have been prevented too. Besides, 24 hours isn't sufficient. The reactors need at least 72 hours to cool.

Beet, if the situation that is so catastrophic that they can't shut it down, it won't make that much of a difference.

[Beet]

Beet, your asteroid argument is just ridiculous.  The chances of an asteroid hit to a nuclear plant are infantesimal.

As for other alternatives... I'm all for having more wind farms and solar plants (preferably less coal).

As for nuclear power plants... they can be shut down.

The Fukushima plants are shut down. You should call the Japanese government and tell them they have no problem. I'm sure they'd be elated to hear the news.

Those were shut down after they lost power, under emergency procedures, hardly ideal.  With warning time of even up to a day, you could easily bring the reaction under control and to shutdown stage (if not even cold shutdown stage with that much lead time).

A warning time of a day is not guaranteed for any disaster. With a warning time of a day, 9/11 could have been prevented too. Besides, 24 hours isn't sufficient. The reactors need at least 72 hours to cool.

Beet, if the situation that is so catastrophic that they can't shut it down, it won't make that much of a difference.

What won't make that much of a difference? It always makes a difference if they can't shut down a reactor & the fallout that would ensue.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Beet, your asteroid argument is just ridiculous.  The chances of an asteroid hit to a nuclear plant are infantesimal.

As for other alternatives... I'm all for having more wind farms and solar plants (preferably less coal).

As for nuclear power plants... they can be shut down.

The Fukushima plants are shut down. You should call the Japanese government and tell them they have no problem. I'm sure they'd be elated to hear the news.

Those were shut down after they lost power, under emergency procedures, hardly ideal.  With warning time of even up to a day, you could easily bring the reaction under control and to shutdown stage (if not even cold shutdown stage with that much lead time).

A warning time of a day is not guaranteed for any disaster. With a warning time of a day, 9/11 could have been prevented too. Besides, 24 hours isn't sufficient. The reactors need at least 72 hours to cool.

No, but 24 hour warning time for hurricanes (if not 48 hours) is pretty reliable.

[Beet]

Beet, your asteroid argument is just ridiculous.  The chances of an asteroid hit to a nuclear plant are infantesimal.

As for other alternatives... I'm all for having more wind farms and solar plants (preferably less coal).

As for nuclear power plants... they can be shut down.

The Fukushima plants are shut down. You should call the Japanese government and tell them they have no problem. I'm sure they'd be elated to hear the news.

Those were shut down after they lost power, under emergency procedures, hardly ideal.  With warning time of even up to a day, you could easily bring the reaction under control and to shutdown stage (if not even cold shutdown stage with that much lead time).

A warning time of a day is not guaranteed for any disaster. With a warning time of a day, 9/11 could have been prevented too. Besides, 24 hours isn't sufficient. The reactors need at least 72 hours to cool.

No, but 24 hour warning time for hurricanes (if not 48 hours) is pretty reliable.

And 24 hours is not sufficient, as I said. It takes 72 hours to fully shut down a reactor. Besides, hurricane is only one of many potential risks.

[J. J.]

Beet, your asteroid argument is just ridiculous.  The chances of an asteroid hit to a nuclear plant are infantesimal.

As for other alternatives... I'm all for having more wind farms and solar plants (preferably less coal).

As for nuclear power plants... they can be shut down.

The Fukushima plants are shut down. You should call the Japanese government and tell them they have no problem. I'm sure they'd be elated to hear the news.

Those were shut down after they lost power, under emergency procedures, hardly ideal.  With warning time of even up to a day, you could easily bring the reaction under control and to shutdown stage (if not even cold shutdown stage with that much lead time).

A warning time of a day is not guaranteed for any disaster. With a warning time of a day, 9/11 could have been prevented too. Besides, 24 hours isn't sufficient. The reactors need at least 72 hours to cool.

Beet, if the situation that is so catastrophic that they can't shut it down, it won't make that much of a difference.

What won't make that much of a difference? It always makes a difference if they can't shut down a reactor & the fallout that would ensue.

Beet, so far the death toll from radiation is zero.  The known death toll from the cause of the problem is 3,600.

[Beet]

Beet, your asteroid argument is just ridiculous.  The chances of an asteroid hit to a nuclear plant are infantesimal.

As for other alternatives... I'm all for having more wind farms and solar plants (preferably less coal).

As for nuclear power plants... they can be shut down.

The Fukushima plants are shut down. You should call the Japanese government and tell them they have no problem. I'm sure they'd be elated to hear the news.

Those were shut down after they lost power, under emergency procedures, hardly ideal.  With warning time of even up to a day, you could easily bring the reaction under control and to shutdown stage (if not even cold shutdown stage with that much lead time).

A warning time of a day is not guaranteed for any disaster. With a warning time of a day, 9/11 could have been prevented too. Besides, 24 hours isn't sufficient. The reactors need at least 72 hours to cool.

Beet, if the situation that is so catastrophic that they can't shut it down, it won't make that much of a difference.

What won't make that much of a difference? It always makes a difference if they can't shut down a reactor & the fallout that would ensue.

Beet, so far the death toll from radiation is zero.  The known death toll from the cause of the problem is 3,600.

No, the death toll from radiation is unknown. One worker has died from being trapped in a shaft in the plant. This could very well have been radiation caused. I do not minimize the tsunami deaths from this discussion, both tsunami and nuclear problems are very real.