record of debate

Share PageHide My Account Post Help Logout INBOX MARKETPLACE MEDIA LOCKER MY SITE SEARCH Marketplace Clothing & Accessories Shoes Beauty & Health Jewelry & Watches Fragrances & Perfume Kids Baby & Toddler Electronics & Cell Phones Computers & Accessories Movies, Music, Games & Books Home & Garden Collectibles & Art Sports & Outdoors Professional Services Car Parts & Accessories Everything ElseContent Blogs Photos Video Events Reviews LinksPeopleGroups Eiko's SiteHomeBlogPhotosVideoLinks Live from helicopter Jun 29, '12 11:24 AM for everyone Live stream by Ustream 2:00 AM(PST) on the 29th of June in front of the premier's residence, people will gather for demonstrating against the restart of Oi nuclear power plant. Turnout on last Friday was 45,000. Ustream is a private internet TV. Embeded code didn't work. http://www.ustream.tv/channel/iwakamiyasumi4 direct link to view from the sky Prev: WWIII Next: gap will tear away the society. reply edit delete 17 CommentsChronological Reverse Threaded delete replymorosoph wrote on Jun 29 I click through and see puppies. :-/ edit delete replymercedo wrote on Jun 29 Yeah in GMT it starts at 23:00 on 29th of June. It's off line till then. Japan's economy is on the ebb and more and more heading for a totalitarian society. Restart of nuclear power plant, spread of radioactive contamination to all Japan, tax increase, etc..Recent movement is a threat to democracy. delete replyengineerpoet wrote on Jun 29 You do realize that the combustion of coal (which is part of what's replaced the missing nuclear capacity) releases radioactives in the gases and fly ash? edit delete replymercedo wrote on Jun 29 We don't need replacement for nuclear power. Nuclear power has been used in replacement of fossil energy for generating electricity. That's the problem. We need to start R&D of using nuclear energy directly converting to electricity. Decommission them or we are decommissioned. delete replyengineerpoet wrote on Jun 29 mercedo said We don't need replacement for nuclear power. Well, only if you don't want lights, air conditioning, water, jobs... edit delete replymercedo wrote on Jun 30 I mean nuclear energy has much deeper potential than other conventional energy. But current system, boiling water by heat emitted from nuclear fusion, is not efficient enough for it to make the most of. delete replyengineerpoet wrote on Jun 30 Perhaps you can get close to 50% efficiency using supercritical CO2 instead of boiling water as the working fluid. Still, boiling water was a pretty good option in 1970, and uranium is too cheap to worry much about small differences in thermal efficiency. delete replyengineerpoet wrote on Jun 30 mercedo said Nuclear power has been used in replacement of fossil energy for generating electricity. And vice versa. Months ago, while many Japanese nuclear plants were still running, Japan's oil imports had already risen by over 110,000 barrels/day to supply replacement electricity. That is in addition to increased imports of coal and LNG. Japan cannot stand to pay for all this fuel, nor can it stand the pollution it creates. Japan's fate is tied to its nuclear energy systems: Decommission them, and you WILL be decommissioned. edit delete replymercedo wrote on Jun 30 engineerpoet said Japan's fate is tied to its nuclear energy systems True in a bad sense, in a good sense too. >Decommission them, and you WILL be decommissioned. We have 54 reactors, if 4 or 5 old ones go to decommissioned, our national budget disappears. So some people think it's better to wait earthquake to happen, and we don't need long laborious work for decommission. delete replyengineerpoet wrote on Jun 30 mercedo said We have 54 reactors, if 4 or 5 old ones go to decommissioned, our national budget disappears. So some people think it's better to wait earthquake to happen, and we don't need long laborious work for decommission. This does not make sense in English. Explain, if you would. Decommissioning means removing fuel, demolishing structure and putting contaminated components in safe storage. The quake and tsunami at Fukushima Dai'ichi neither removed fuel nor put contaminated components in storage. Exactly what you mean by "waiting for an earthquake to happen" is not obvious. Suppose the quake happens. The plant SCRAMs when the P-waves hit. The S-waves strike. Either the plant requires repairs afterward, or it does not. What is the labor saved either way? edit delete replymercedo wrote today at 2:03 AM Several reactors are over 30 years, and it takes huge money for decommission, so electric company people are reluctant to do so. Suppose after 30 years from now, many reactors reach their lifespan. Can electric company decommission many reactors at the same time? I wrote they are reluctant to do so, but it's not true. They don't intend to decommission any of them from the beginning. After they earned enough, they would abandon Japan. For these two or three years, we have heard number of minor accidents and malfunction in old nuclear power plants. But they were able to attribute to earthquake and tsunami. They were laughing behind the scenes that they were able to get away with the mistakes they made and now government is decommissioning 6 reactors in Fukushima dai'ichi with tax. They must have thought that they were luckiest people in the world. delete replymorosoph wrote on Jun 29 Nature recently published that some scientists are attempting to block the restart. Apparently, the threat of earthquakes 'is underestimated'. delete replyengineerpoet wrote on Jun 30 If the other faults haven't ruptured in 120,000 years, it's vanishingly unlikely that they'd go during the remaining life of the Ohi plant. delete replymorosoph wrote on Jun 30 This raises the question: what are these scientists doing? If it is rational to persist with the nuclear programme, shouldn't they be reassuring the population? delete replyengineerpoet wrote on Jun 30 morosoph said If it is rational to persist with the nuclear programme, shouldn't they be reassuring the population? If the population is hyperventilating about levels of radiation exposure within 20% of the world average, would rational discussion go anywhere? edit delete replymercedo wrote on Jun 30 People just ignore the fact that disaster would happen. We need more energy than nuclear energy to stop nuclear energy. delete replyengineerpoet wrote on Jun 30 mercedo said People just ignore the fact that disaster would happen. Even Fukushima Dai'ichi is not a disaster. The tsunami killed close to 30,000; that was a disaster. The problems with the reactors are unlikely to harm even 1/1000 as many. Look at Fukushima Dai'ini; no problems at all! Onagawa plant was a center for refugees after the disaster. Future plants will be stronger and safer. Where is Japan's confidence in its abilities and its future? audio reply video replyAdd a Comment For: Add a comment to this blog entry, for everyone Send mercedo a personal message Subject: - Quote original message allenzadr eglamkowski engineerpoet morosoph deamos Viewing History Viewed 38 times by 7 people, latest on Jun 30Viewing HistoryView This Page as Another User mercedo Eiko Onoda Fukuoka , Japan Upgrade My Account Customize My Site Promote My Site My Contacts (23) My Groups (7) Shop Online in the Marketplace · Philippines Marketplace · Indonesia Marketplace · Open a Free Shop © 2012 Multiply · English · About · Blog · Terms · Privacy · Corporate · Advertise · API · Help · Sitemap Template design - Copyright © 2005 Sam Royama All rights reserved. placeholder Share Page