• Huge anti-nuclear demonstration staged in Tokyo
    77 replies, posted
The only person being condescending is you, Florence. While I agree that we need to move towards renewable energy sources, the fact is the world simply can't live off it with the current technology. It would be infeasible. Until then, Nuclear Energy is the cleanest and most effective means of energy we have. We need to focus on what we can do, while encouraging development on future technology. We can't switch to renewable right away.
[QUOTE=Florence;36794249]Ever heard of nuclear waste? Wannna take a wild guess as to how much it costs to manage it? And by the way, the entire point of this is to ditch these non-renewable energies is favor of renewable ones. I don't give a fuck if it is the cleanest out of the old energies, it's irrelevant. Breaking news: Nuclear isn't a new energy source. Nuclear is a dirty-as-shit, non-renewable, old energy. Swapping out a non-renewable energy for another is just dick jerking that makes you feel really good. Two words: Depleted Uranium. Ever heard of depleted uranium rounds? You know, the stuff we shoot up darkies with overseas that creates horrific birth defects all over the place? Bitch please. Yeah I wonder why they'd have such a negative attitude towards nuclear - oh, maybe THAT might have given them a bad impression. Wait nope just all sensationalism bullshit rite. Not like there are actual reasons why the anti-nuclear people don't want to keep investing in nuclear power. Fuck you the lot of you with your condescending bullshit.[/QUOTE] We have enough nuclear material to power current reactors for thousands of years. Waste can be reused for Liquid Salt Reactors so there's no waste problem if we actually put money into Thorium. Bitch please DU rounds are Anti Armor. And yeah actually Fukushima was sensationalised cause everyone trips balls when they hear nuclear. 0/10 Padawan, come back with better arguments.
[QUOTE=Reds;36793195]I hate how that nuclear power plants can run smoothly for years and years, but the moment something goes wrong, and it's particularly annoying since this was the fault of the tsunami, everything gets put back twenty years.[/QUOTE] The fact that there was a tsunami doesn't excuse the fact that TEPCO fucked up on numerous occasions when it came to safety. People should be protesting about the lack of regulations in the nuclear industry, not for an outright cessation of it.
[QUOTE=QwertySecond;36793868]I'm really surprised the Japanese population has such a strong anti-nuclear sentiment. I thought their education was of a very good standard and their culture readily embraced technology in all it's forms. I'd imagine the blame lies with sensationalist media, which is a worrying demonstration of it's influence.[/QUOTE] Well considering they've experienced multiple nuclear related disasters can you blame them?
[QUOTE=Florence;36794249]Ever heard of nuclear waste? Wannna take a wild guess as to how much it costs to manage it? And by the way, the entire point of this is to ditch these non-renewable energies is favor of renewable ones. I don't give a fuck if it is the cleanest out of the old energies, it's irrelevant. Breaking news: Nuclear isn't a new energy source. Nuclear is a dirty-as-shit, non-renewable, old energy. Swapping out a non-renewable energy for another is just dick jerking that makes you feel really good. Two words: Depleted Uranium. Ever heard of depleted uranium rounds? You know, the stuff we shoot up darkies with overseas that creates horrific birth defects all over the place? Bitch please. Yeah I wonder why they'd have such a negative attitude towards nuclear - oh, maybe THAT might have given them a bad impression. Wait nope just all sensationalism bullshit rite. Not like there are actual reasons why the anti-nuclear people don't want to keep investing in nuclear power. Fuck you the lot of you with your condescending bullshit.[/QUOTE] DU rounds are only used to penetrate armor. When was the last time you heard of the Taliban fielding MBTs?
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;36794767]Well considering they've experienced multiple nuclear related disasters can you blame them?[/QUOTE] Actually, yes. Fear is no excuse for ignorance of the fact that nuclear power is responsible for less pollution and loss of life than any other major energy source we have ever developed. Also, the only major nuclear accident I can find in Japan is the Fukishima disaster, with the Tokaimura accident (resulting in 2 fatalities) falling considerably behind it...surely you're not comparing a nuclear reactor to a nuclear weapon, are you?
This is why we need to invest in thorium, Uranium is a press disaster for nuclear energy among other things. [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK367T7h6ZY[/url] (Thorium reactors in five minutes, can't tag it for shit.)
To be honest i saw this coming the day i heard about the tsunami, eh i still have nothing against nuclear power it is best choice at this moment.
[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;36795154]Actually, yes. Fear is no excuse for ignorance of the fact that nuclear power is responsible for less pollution and loss of life than any other major energy source we have ever developed. Also, the only major nuclear accident I can find in Japan is the Fukishima disaster, with the Tokaimura accident (resulting in 2 fatalities) falling considerably behind it...surely you're not comparing a nuclear reactor to a nuclear weapon, are you?[/QUOTE] I'm not comparing it, just saying that'll be how they see it. I support the use of nuclear power (or thorium once it finally becomes main stream).
[QUOTE=Apache249;36794804][QUOTE=Florence;36794249]Two words: Depleted Uranium. Ever heard of depleted uranium rounds? You know, the stuff we shoot up darkies with overseas that creates horrific birth defects all over the place? Bitch please.[/quote] DU rounds are only used to penetrate armor. When was the last time you heard of the Taliban fielding MBTs?[/QUOTE] Depleted uranium shells were still used by tanks at Fallujah to blind fire into houses during Operation Phantom Fury. So were white phosphorus grenades and artillery shells. Cluster bombs were even employed to bombard the fuck out of the city. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_occupation_of_Fallujah#U.S..E2.80.93Iraqi_offensive_of_November_7.2C_2004[/url] We used pretty much everything we had there.
[QUOTE=Kendra;36793439]People don't even realise that nuclear energy is the most reliable and the cleanest out of the non-renewable resources. Idiots. This nuclear energy fear is gonna put a real ditch into funding of thorium plants and cold fusion. (For those that don't know, cold fusion is the fusion of a deuterium and a tritium atom, to make helium-4 and a neutron. This neutron then decays by beta-negative decay, which can be stopped by a lead wall and leaves no hazardous residue [infact, a hydrogen atom is most likely to form since you're left with a proton and an electron], and the antielectron neutrino decays into light.) SO GET ON COLD FUSION ALREADY.[/QUOTE] Cold fusion is not as you described. You described hot fusion, which is already in place but is not a viable option as it is not energy efficient. Cold fusion is a horrible idea for mass energy production as opposed to hot fusion, even once energy production is efficient. Quite frankly, with current technology, Japan might as well detonate the plants instead of just shutting them down. Either way their entire energy grid will fail and many will die considering, oddly enough, hospitals run on energy. Backup generators will only last for so long. People want cheap and efficient power, but they are unwilling to put up with the risks associated with it. Either stop being powerhogs or get used to the cons of nuclear plants.
[QUOTE=Glorbo;36793599]Nuclear Fusion is anything but cold.[/QUOTE] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fusion[/url] Fusion [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion[/url] Cold fusion Learn the difference.
I don't think we should judge Japan for this. They've been through some shit in the last few years.
[QUOTE=Timebomb575;36794313]Because Im sure we're using [I]armor piercing tank shells[/I] against all those insurgent tanks, right?[/QUOTE] Now that's just fucking hilarious. [url]http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2012/01/2012126394859797.html[/url] [url]http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/30/faulluja-birth-defects-iraq[/url] That's one of the cases out of many. Good try though, thanks for playing! [QUOTE=Timebomb575;36794313]Renewables straight up dont work in some places of the world. Hydro doesn't work where there isnt large amounts of flowing water, wind and solar dont work in areas that are strapped for space or arent sunny or windy, and geothermal has its own laundry list of problems[/QUOTE] Conceded. I was never saying nuclear was totally out of the picture, my POV from the beginning was that nuclear isn't this godsend and those who find major issues with it aren't dumbfucks and reactionaries. I'm saying that betting on nuclear as THE future energy won't work out in the long term due to issues such as waste disposal (or rather storage) and the inflating costs of managing it, the environmental costs of uranium mining and such, the RISING costs of nuclear power and the ABSURD amount of subsidies we give to the nuclear industry (why is a very profitable industry). And this is assuming that nothing ever goes wrong with the power plants themselves (which, I agree, isn't this looming Apocalypse, but is a legitimate concern considering the lacking regulations and independent oversight in some parts of the world). [QUOTE=Zally13;36794373]The only person being condescending is you, Florence.[/QUOTE] Oh fuck me, I broke some balls on the internet over their bullshit. But you know what I didn't do? Tell someone that they are an idiot people because they don't support X or say someone is inherently fearful because he doesn't think like me. I actually was constructive instead of herp-derping in a circlejerk.
[url]http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1566308?uid=3738032&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&sid=47699134153537[/url] Don't blame them so readily. [editline]16th July 2012[/editline] Oh shit, I forgot you guys won't be able to access jstor
[QUOTE=PowerBall v1;36793753]But all that could have been avoided using proper equipment an safety standards!! Really you need to start looking at things rationally!![/QUOTE] A hard hat a day keeps rock slides away!
[QUOTE=st_nick5;36793159]So apparently a massive tsunami is "man-made".[/QUOTE] What a perfectly reasonable misstatement. They're saying that poor regulations and failure of communication all around caused the meltdown to be as massive as it was
[QUOTE=Florence;36795937]I actually was constructive instead of herp-derping in a circlejerk.[/QUOTE] Oh shut up already, if using a thousand obscenities and calling out people is how being constructive is, then let me join the circle jerk.
[QUOTE=prooboo;36797504]What a perfectly reasonable misstatement. They're saying that poor regulations and failure of communication all around caused the meltdown to be as massive as it was[/QUOTE] Yeah an earthquake didn't make everyone in a 30km radius have to abandon their homes and belongings.
[QUOTE=person11;36795776]I don't think we should judge Japan for this. They've been through some shit in the last few years.[/QUOTE] Nah, fuck that, just cause their outdated reactor got slammed by a big wave that doesn't give them any excuse to give in to unfounded fear and the stupidity of the masses.
[QUOTE=Zambies!;36797857]Oh shut up already, if using a thousand obscenities and calling out people is how being constructive is, then let me join the circle jerk.[/QUOTE] But Facepunch as a whole is so condescending when it comes to nuclear power. The majority waits for the first person to take the bait and say "Hey look, nuclear has its faults too" and then jumps on them and recycles the same arguments about current renewable energy being bad and nuclear waste being disposable (if not economically viable).
I think the issue in Japan lies less with nuclear power and more with the rampant corruption in their government. The earthquake shouldn't have caused as much trouble with the power plants as it did.
Hmm, I wonder if the end of World War II could have indirectly fueled this fear of nuclear power. Something as big as that can have an immense impact on one's culture and perhaps the incidents with nuclear power just sparked it.
[QUOTE=Splash Attack;36799578]Hmm, I wonder if the end of World War II could have indirectly fueled this fear of nuclear power. Something as big as that can have an immense impact on one's culture and perhaps the incidents with nuclear power just sparked it.[/QUOTE] It's because of the Cold War and nuclear weapons and their proliferation.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_Science_(book)[/url] Make this book mandatory reading material for all reporters.(It focuses on mostly medical aspects, but same applies to other fields)
They want both their touchey-feely solar/wind "renewable" power architecture AND their comfortable metropolitan life where production is delegated and people drive cars and have an Internet connection. Grow up.
We should build a nuclear power wonderland in greenland, route power everywhere, profit.
[QUOTE=Florence;36795937]Now that's just fucking hilarious. [url]http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2012/01/2012126394859797.html[/url] [url]http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/30/faulluja-birth-defects-iraq[/url] That's one of the cases out of many. Good try though, thanks for playing! Conceded. I was never saying nuclear was totally out of the picture, my POV from the beginning was that nuclear isn't this godsend and those who find major issues with it aren't dumbfucks and reactionaries. I'm saying that betting on nuclear as THE future energy won't work out in the long term due to issues such as waste disposal (or rather storage) and the inflating costs of managing it, the environmental costs of uranium mining and such, the RISING costs of nuclear power and the ABSURD amount of subsidies we give to the nuclear industry (why is a very profitable industry). And this is assuming that nothing ever goes wrong with the power plants themselves (which, I agree, isn't this looming Apocalypse, but is a legitimate concern considering the lacking regulations and independent oversight in some parts of the world). Oh fuck me, I broke some balls on the internet over their bullshit. But you know what I didn't do? Tell someone that they are an idiot people because they don't support X or say someone is inherently fearful because he doesn't think like me. I actually was constructive instead of herp-derping in a circlejerk.[/QUOTE] lol do you even read the sources you post [quote]"This is the first instance of something like this in all our family," Rahim told Al Jazeera. "We lived in an area that was heavily bombed by the Americans in 2004, and a missile landed right in front of our home. What else could cause these health problems besides this?"[/quote] "A happened, and B happened after, so A must have caused B"
[QUOTE=Kendra;36793439]This nuclear energy fear is gonna put a real ditch into funding of thorium plants and cold fusion. (For those that don't know, cold fusion is the fusion of a deuterium and a tritium atom, to make helium-4 and a neutron. This neutron then decays by beta-negative decay, which can be stopped by a lead wall and leaves no hazardous residue [infact, a hydrogen atom is most likely to form since you're left with a proton and an electron], and the antielectron neutrino decays into light.) SO GET ON COLD FUSION ALREADY.[/QUOTE] [quote=Wikipedia]Cold fusion is a proposed[1] type of nuclear reaction that would occur at relatively low temperatures compared with hot fusion. As a new type of nuclear reaction, it was proposed to explain reports by experimenters of anomalously high energy generation under certain specific laboratory conditions. It has been rejected by the mainstream scientific community because [B]the original experimental results could not be replicated consistently and reliably[/B], and because [B]there is no generally accepted theoretical model of cold fusion[/B].[/quote] Cold fusion is bullshit. [editline]16th July 2012[/editline] You just described a type of hot nuclear fusion anyway, dunno what you're on about
[quote]Those taking part included Nobel-winning author Kenzaburo Oe and musician and composer Ryuichi Sakamoto.[/quote] I'm curious as to why the journalist included this into the article. Not to bash, but an author and a musician at a protest about something seated in the science/economic category isn't something to report. I wonder if there were any scientists there. I'm going to take a guess and say no.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.