PDA

View Full Version : Pandora's Promise



lone-wolf
01-27-2014, 07:50 PM
It's on netflix. Former anti-nuclear environmentalists singing a different tune.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fm8SVLOacQ

Strewth
01-27-2014, 08:51 PM
Looks good, I'll check it out. I hope it deals with the explosion of energy users we'll have to deal with as a species if we want to drag the entire population of the planet up a notch. I really can't believe people are against nuclear power. If we could solidly get behind it, I think space would be open to us as a resource base and a garbage dump in short order. Gotta take the long view...

Also keen to see if it talks about Thorium, and how it's been suppressed as an energy source in favour of fissionables that can be used as weapons...

coastal
01-27-2014, 09:21 PM
How does nuclear power hold up to earthquakes and tsunamis? That's what I'd be concerned with.

:pot:

Strewth
01-27-2014, 09:30 PM
^:)Put the reactor on a train, or bury it...
http://commonsensecanadian.ca/thorium-reactor-energy-option/
I dunno if this is "The Answer" but it seems promising....

lone-wolf
01-27-2014, 09:41 PM
How does nuclear power hold up to earthquakes and tsunamis? That's what I'd be concerned with.

:pot:

Actually, the issue was human error in Japan. They assumed the coolant system was flowing, when it wasn't. I screwed up a few times in jobs during my life by assuming things, I felt like crap for it, can't imagine how they feel.
They solved this issue back in the 80s and 90s, as explained in the movie.

Rory McCanuck
01-27-2014, 09:54 PM
But the science is settl...oh wait, wrong crowd.
Nuclear is far from perfect, but it is certainly better, cleaner and more power-full than just about everything else.

Great article Strewth.
That looks to be the answer to most of the "inconvenient" questions.
Any idea how far away they are from making a proper go with them?

lone-wolf
01-27-2014, 10:12 PM
fun fact: For the past two decades, 10 percent of all the electricity consumed in the United States has come from Russian nuclear warheads.
http://www.npr.org/2013/12/11/250007526/megatons-to-megawatts-russian-warheads-fuel-u-s-power-plants

From dec 2013, apparently the deal is over now that russia isn't in shambles and isn't having a fire sale on anything they can.

Strewth
01-27-2014, 10:40 PM
But the science is settl...oh wait, wrong crowd.
Nuclear is far from perfect, but it is certainly better, cleaner and more power-full than just about everything else.

Great article Strewth.
That looks to be the answer to most of the "inconvenient" questions.
Any idea how far away they are from making a proper go with them?

From my casual digging around the subject, I hate to say it, but it really seems like tinfoil time; there's no reason they couldn't be up and running right now aside from outside/political pressure? I'd love to hear a technical (well, semi-technical) answer on why we're not using the darn things, I don't want to blame some cabal of Rothschilds, oil barons, and lizard people, but...
I really hope the Chinese get them up and running. That would make a huge dint in coal use, Chinese average standard of living, and global environmental destruction.
:)Plus then maybe we can steal the tech.
India is supposed to have huge Thorium reserves, and be looking into reactors as well? Crazy stuff.

lone-wolf
01-27-2014, 10:51 PM
I find it ironic people are against natural gas exploration, and nuclear power while claiming it's for environmental reasons.
Oh, you hear that? That's the coal plant starting up cause the wind ain't blowing and the sun ain't shining and people worried about their health burnt cop cars in NB cause they're afraid of fracking.

coastal
01-27-2014, 11:27 PM
Actually, the issue was human error in Japan. They assumed the coolant system was flowing, when it wasn't. I screwed up a few times in jobs during my life by assuming things, I felt like crap for it, can't imagine how they feel.
They solved this issue back in the 80s and 90s, as explained in the movie.

Does it really matter whose error it was? It happened, and it shows how volatile these things are when nature gets mad and or a human has an error.

Not to mention the tritium leak in the USA a couple weeks ago from a plant. ;)

Strewth
01-28-2014, 01:15 AM
^You should watch the movie coastal. Netflix is free for a month...or if you like, Google the amount of tritrium leaked vs, well, pretty much everything. As to the accident in Japan, that reactor was based on '60s tech, and it doesn't have to happen again.
I just finished the show, and because I agree with everything it says, I think it was really good;).
As always after a cinema documentary you have to do your own tracking of source material and statistics, but hearing environmentalists that were strongly against nuclear power because "it's bad" change their mind through fact checking and personal research sends I think a powerful message.
I give it two thumbs up, although my personal disclaimer is that I think we're done as a species without nuclear power.

One side note from the movie that I found very interesting, (that I could have Googled myself, but instead choose to live in bliss:)) was that 80% of France's electricity comes from nuclear power, and they're selling it to the rest of Europe, while having low internal energy costs (and carbon footprints). I always wondered why France was spoken of with Germany as the glue holding the EU together.

Metric Warrior
01-28-2014, 08:01 AM
These leaks don't have to happen.... yet they do. Human error will always be a factor.
It is just a matter of time for another to have a catastrophe.

Unlike oil that can be skimmed up and even have bio-organisms digest, what does one do when a reactor has a meltdown? Sweep it up?
I also don't believe all the truth is being 'leaked' by the Japanese gov't on what is really going on. Pun intended. :)

I read recently that there are great strides being made in nuclear fusion.

awndray
01-28-2014, 08:20 AM
Even though it's from CNN, it looks interesting. I just added it to my Netflix list. Thanks.

coastal
01-28-2014, 09:13 AM
^You should watch the movie coastal. Netflix is free for a month...or if you like, Google the amount of tritrium leaked vs, well, pretty much everything. As to the accident in Japan, that reactor was based on '60s tech, and it doesn't have to happen again.
I just finished the show, and because I agree with everything it says, I think it was really good;).
As always after a cinema documentary you have to do your own tracking of source material and statistics, but hearing environmentalists that were strongly against nuclear power because "it's bad" change their mind through fact checking and personal research sends I think a powerful message.
I give it two thumbs up, although my personal disclaimer is that I think we're done as a species without nuclear power.

One side note from the movie that I found very interesting, (that I could have Googled myself, but instead choose to live in bliss:)) was that 80% of France's electricity comes from nuclear power, and they're selling it to the rest of Europe, while having low internal energy costs (and carbon footprints). I always wondered why France was spoken of with Germany as the glue holding the EU together.

I will watch it, but like any other indy style documentary i'm sure I will agree with it until I fact check. lol

If I went by documentaries on Netflix, 911 is for sure a conspiracy, Al Gore tells us an inconvenient truth about global warming, and so on.

Here's a tidbit I read a while back. There are 23 of the exact same reactors as Fukushima in the USA, and I believe 94 or so all over the world. I'm not sure if the movie addressed that?

http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2011/03/13/6256121-general-electric-designed-reactors-in-fukushima-have-23-sisters-in-us

I know the tritium leak was minor, but it was a leak, and what if if was major?

Until they can provide a pill that makes animal life immune to radiation, I'm not a fan of nuclear and its possible catastrophic effects.

Gotta keep this pot stirred!

Claven2
01-28-2014, 09:28 AM
But the science is settl...oh wait, wrong crowd.
Nuclear is far from perfect, but it is certainly better, cleaner and more power-full than just about everything else.

Great article Strewth.
That looks to be the answer to most of the "inconvenient" questions.
Any idea how far away they are from making a proper go with them?

I am a proponent of nuclear power, particularly since Canada has some of the world's largest uranium reserves. That being said, I'd rather see WAY more hydro-electric projects in un-populated areas. Of course, the greenies are even MORE against this than nuclear plants because someone once spotted a rainbow trout swimming past the area in question or a spotted jay made a nest in a tree nearby.

Strewth
01-28-2014, 10:14 AM
I am a proponent of nuclear power, particularly since Canada has some of the world's largest uranium reserves. That being said, I'd rather see WAY more hydro-electric projects in un-populated areas. Of course, the greenies are even MORE against this than nuclear plants because someone once spotted a rainbow trout swimming past the area in question or a spotted jay made a nest in a tree nearby.

I am so glad we punched through the hydro dam projects when we did in BC, we're trying to put up another, and it's....a bit contentious. I think it's going to get railroaded through however, which, bad as it is for the three toed sludge newt, is ironically needed to keep the fossil fuel extraction process alive in this province....

Strewth
01-28-2014, 10:20 AM
Here's a tidbit I read a while back. There are 23 of the exact same reactors as Fukushima in the USA, and I believe 94 or so all over the world. I'm not sure if the movie addressed that?

http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2011/03/13/6256121-general-electric-designed-reactors-in-fukushima-have-23-sisters-in-us


Yes, it does...but as you say fact checking is always required. There's a couple of "Pandora De-bunked" blogs and a video floating around the 'net, and in the interest of fairness I was going to post them here, but then I saw they said the same thing; we should globally power down, and ramp up wind farms. Neither of these ideas is sustainable, or even particularly bright, given population growth coupled with self-interest, and the debacle the Ontario wind farms have turned into. But perhaps there's a better Anti-Pandora message out there, I'll keep poking around.

Metric Warrior
01-28-2014, 01:09 PM
Yes, it does...but as you say fact checking is always required. There's a couple of "Pandora De-bunked" blogs and a video floating around the 'net, and in the interest of fairness I was going to post them here, but then I saw they said the same thing; we should globally power down, and ramp up wind farms. Neither of these ideas is sustainable, or even particularly bright, given population growth coupled with self-interest, and the debacle the Ontario wind farms have turned into. But perhaps there's a better Anti-Pandora message out there, I'll keep poking around.

Not to mention the terrible pollution created for wind farms, for the magnets they need.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1350811/In-China-true-cost-Britains-clean-green-wind-power-experiment-Pollution-disastrous-scale.html

awndray
01-28-2014, 01:11 PM
Or the effect these wind farms have on migratory birds.

Rory McCanuck
01-28-2014, 01:58 PM
I think those wind farm turbines actually cost more energy than they put out, don't they?
The amount of resources expended to build them exceeds what they will put out in their service life?
Not sure about that, it's an honest question.
Then there's the amount of power they take to run, http://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Wind-Power/How-Much-Power-do-Wind-Turbines-Use.html

Strewth
01-28-2014, 02:12 PM
^That's similar to one of the throw-away lines from the video I'd like to check; there's a claim that if you take everything involved in the use of an Iphone (factory, servers, transport, ?) it uses as much energy as a refrigerator.

For wind farms, I'm understanding (maybe?) that the fossil fuel electricity plant must keep running even if the turbines are operating perfectly, as you can't tell if the wind is going to drop off; so there's no reduction in CO2 emissions, or carbon footprints, in fact a net gain in pollution what with the manufacture ($$$!!!) of the turbine, and it's erection and maintenance. Plus the land lost to wind farms, for farming and for wildlife...I'm thinking at the present level of tech they're a boondoogle that should still be at the experimental stage....or we can trot them out to win votes....