A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Japanese nuke power has nearly ended



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old January 26th 12, 11:59 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default Japanese nuke power has nearly ended

On Jan 26, 1:06*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Brad Guth wrote:

Fred wants as much public-funded plutonium and other spendy elements
as he can get his dirty hands on. *Fred wants a multinational cold war
that'll get us into WW3. *Fred doesn't care how risky and spendy
energy gets.


The Guthball has apparently been snorting Drano again.

--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
*only stupid."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Heinrich Heine


In other words, you still can't refute a damn thing we say about
yourself.

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
  #52  
Old January 27th 12, 12:02 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default Japanese nuke power has nearly ended

On Jan 25, 8:22*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Brad Guth wrote:
On Jan 25, 12:48*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Brad Guth wrote:
On Jan 24, 3:52*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Brad Guth wrote:
On Jan 24, 3:23*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Brad Guth wrote:


At least using thorium as reactor fuel is kind of inert by itself, and
without considerable modification in some hybrid or composite version
of reactor fuel that’s mostly thorium, you couldn’t make a WMD if you
had to, much less destroy or even hardly damage the environment from
which thorium came from to begin with.


Thorium reactors produce fissile material just like any others.


Nothing WMD worthy, at least not for hundreds or thousands of years,
and that fluid thorium fuel is easily cleanable on the fly.


What colossal ignorance! *Thorium in a reactor will capture neutrons
and turn into U233.


Only on demand,


Gee, a nuclear reaction that only occurs when you ask it to?


BWAAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAAAhahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!! !!!!!


... and U233 is not going to become a serious problem like
plutonium and other nasty elements are.


U233 is damn as near the perfect material to make atomic bombs from.
So much for the "couldn't make a WMD" part of your remark.


The all-inclusive cost of burning thorium isn't 10% that of a
conventional uranium or MOX fueled reactor that's anything but
failsafe.


Cite for your claims for costs?


Mining, processing, reactor fueling, fuel burning, fuel
replenishments, secondary purifying or filtering of that fuel (on the
fly as needed), spent fuel management gets practically insignificant,
reactor melt downs easily eliminated, absolute minimal environmental
impacts and zilch worth of WMD or terrorists issues are all way
cheaper, less problematic and failsafe.


Do you know what 'cite' means, you dimbulb?



Why are you opposed to electric energy customers paying one cent/kwhr
of reliably clean and essentially renewable energy?


Where did I say I was, you lying little sack?



Are you suggesting Earth doesn't have enough thorium, and otherwise
needs all the plutonium it can possibly get?


Where did I say that, you lying little sack?



Are you suggesting our national power grids simply can’t be greatly
improved and expanded?


Where did I say that, you lying little sack?

--
"False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the
*soul with evil."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Socrates


Your highly Semitic/oligarch actions speak very loud and clear.

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
  #53  
Old January 27th 12, 12:04 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default Japanese nuke power has nearly ended

On Jan 25, 8:17*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Brad Guth wrote:
On Jan 25, 12:48*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Brad Guth wrote:
On Jan 24, 3:52*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Brad Guth wrote:
On Jan 24, 3:23*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Brad Guth wrote:


At least using thorium as reactor fuel is kind of inert by itself, and
without considerable modification in some hybrid or composite version
of reactor fuel that’s mostly thorium, you couldn’t make a WMD if you
had to, much less destroy or even hardly damage the environment from
which thorium came from to begin with.


Thorium reactors produce fissile material just like any others.


Nothing WMD worthy, at least not for hundreds or thousands of years,
and that fluid thorium fuel is easily cleanable on the fly.


What colossal ignorance! *Thorium in a reactor will capture neutrons
and turn into U233.


Only on demand,


Gee, a nuclear reaction that only occurs when you ask it to?


BWAAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAAAhahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!! !!!!!


... and U233 is not going to become a serious problem like
plutonium and other nasty elements are.


U233 is damn as near the perfect material to make atomic bombs from.
So much for the "couldn't make a WMD" part of your remark.


The all-inclusive cost of burning thorium isn't 10% that of a
conventional uranium or MOX fueled reactor that's anything but
failsafe.


Cite for your claims for costs?


Mining, processing, reactor fueling, fuel burning, replenishments,
secondary purifying or filtering, spent fuel management, reactor melt
downs easily eliminated, environmental impacts and zilch worth of WMD
or terrorists issues are are all way cheaper, less problematic and
failsafe.


Why are you opposed to customers paying one cent/kwhr of reliably
clean and essentially renewable energy?


Where did I say I was? *I was merely pointing out that you had made an
outright false and very stupid remark.



Are you suggesting Earth doesn't have enough thorium?


You should stick somewhere close to what I actually write, Guthball.

--
"False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the
*soul with evil."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Socrates


Have you ever contributed anything of value in your life? (if so,
please cite)

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
  #54  
Old January 27th 12, 03:41 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Bob Haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,197
Default Japanese nuke power has nearly ended

on a interesting note as of today there are only 3 operating nuke
plasnts in japan. 94% are off line. and many or all may not be
restarted.

japanese people and many local governments in japan are anti nuke,
after seeing the problems of just one plant melting down

  #55  
Old January 27th 12, 11:59 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default Japanese nuke power has nearly ended

On Jan 27, 6:41*am, bob haller wrote:
on a interesting note as of today there are only 3 operating nuke
plasnts in japan. 94% are off line. and many or all may not be
restarted.

japanese people and many local governments in japan are anti nuke,
after seeing the problems of just one plant melting down


Since the local Energy Mafia controls Japan, and they get to charge as
much as it takes for their energy, is perhaps why they could care
less.

Would you care if getting paid 100+ million dollars per year for the
status quo?

As is, Japan is screwed.

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fog control big brother power power power power! gb6726 Astronomy Misc 0 November 19th 07 07:25 PM
What if HSF ended in 1975? Space Cadet Space Shuttle 24 February 21st 04 06:42 AM
What if HSF ended in 1975? Space Cadet History 26 February 21st 04 06:42 AM
What if HSF ended in 1975? Space Cadet Policy 21 February 21st 04 06:40 AM
Beagle 2 Search Ended Ricardo UK Astronomy 4 February 13th 04 04:18 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.