Page 2 of 36 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 356

Thread: Germany export 4MWh E-Energy although 8 Nuclear-Power-Stations turned off

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    22

    Default

    This links are not proper studies, just some news - if you trust everything you read in newspapers and saw on TV - you are not too smart.
    Can we have some scientific papers with statistics etc? And I don't understand german, sorry.

    Quote Originally Posted by Qaridarium View Post
    your rhetorical question is just a lie and because why? = the magnet field of the earth and the atmosphere save us.
    and another artifice and just a lie! a lie because the nuclear power plants do not have any clinic usage.
    you only use x-ray at clinic if you are "ill" or for research to be healthy in the future.
    you are suggesting that the same is also the same useful is just bullshit and a lie.
    no one needs nuclear power plants but some people need a clinical use of x-ray.
    Atmosphere does indeed saves us from most of solar radiation and X-rays is also radiation...
    But your initial claim was that people die from small doses... there is your small doeses - I did xray few times so far and I often relax in the sun, yet I'm alive.
    If the power plant is operating at normal conditions - it is safer than getting xray once in a year.
    http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...-nuclear-waste (another newspaper, but you seem to accept them as a proof)
    Also burning coil leads to global warming, which leads to ozone layer shrinking and it is the thing that protects earth from solar radiation, ironic, isn't it?

    smoke detectors with radioactive materials are against the law in germany and its against the law in the hole europe.
    only the very very very (ironic part here) smart USA people do use radioactive materials in smoke detectors.
    Afaik radioactive smoke detectors containing americium-241 are banned in Germany and France although they are permitted in other EU Member States, such as the Netherlands, where they are sold in DIY shops.


    in german we have very hard and multiple retested clinical studies that child's get blood cancer if they life 30km in a radius to an nuclear power plant.
    http://www.ippnw-ulm.de/text_ueb-kinderkebs.htm
    now you make your joke again?

    i hope your child will grow up near by a nuclear power plant and i hope your child get cancer just because you are a nuclear power fan boy.

    the germans prove you wrong. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/THTR-300
    the german build your modern (ironic)"SAVE" -thorium high-temperature nuclear reactor-
    and they prove it wrong in "safety"
    now whats up ? your modern super save thorium-high-temperature-nuclear-reactor isn't save..
    so you are a liar.
    Again, I can't read german and wiki article says station was closed due to maintenance costs.
    I fail to understand how living near nuclear reactor where radiation levels are not higher than anywhere else and lower than in xray room where doctors actually work whole day can be a harm.

    i don't care about ecology if it comes to human healthy like nuclear power plants.
    Ecology = your health either way.

    liar my own 10,5 kwp solar-electric-power plants use ZERO space.
    and most of the german solar power stations are ZERO SPACE ones.
    Consumer solar panels can't really power a big factory, and solar power plants with power output compareable to a modern nuclear plant will be quite big - you need to cut down some trees to put there a solar plant.
    Also solar panel production is not a cleanest technology in the world: "Making solar panels, which are in many ways directly descended from semiconductors, also produces toxic byproducts that could sicken living beings, warns the SVTC. Among these are caustic liquids like silicon tetrachloride, dusts and nanoparticles like kerf (a remnant from cutting silicon ingots), and potent greenhouse gases like sulfur hexafluoride."

    LOL--- not really studies show that cars kill 10000 times more birds.
    and you can build wind plants in places without any birds and you can build wind mills without any bird effect
    for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savonius_wind_turbine
    And studies show that more people get hit by cars vs dead from radiation exposure - not an argument. And my point was green energy is in fact not that "green".
    Besides this ones you linked can't produce much power, otherwise we'd built those, not normal ones.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,591

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qaridarium View Post
    and its a lie that human people can handle tiny dosages.

    lets ban x-rays then and bananas and air travel

    you clearly don't understand a thing about industrial safety do you??

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    115

    Default Or how about this:

    The amount of people, and other effects the continued use of coal especially (as well as gas) on medical, ie respiratory illness from soot has caused far more injuries and death than nuclear power.

    Coal is also alot dirtier than nuclear power. Nuclear power can and still si advancing. Coal isnt.

    We are NOT going to replace our current main power sources of Coal/Other fossil fuels with a high output and reliable renewable energy source, within the next 10 or 50 or 100 years at our current development.

    We CAN do that with Nuclear pwoer, in sync with other green power sources. Nuclear pwoer is way cleaner than many currently used power sources, and efficient for large scale uses.

    OC 100% renewable and green power is ideal, but it cannot happen with the way humans are in any reasonable amount of time.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    21

    Default

    if you actually go to a Chernobyl zone you would see a plenty of animals there nowadays and some humans too, therefore you claims is a pure bullshit.
    This must be the worst bullshit I've ever read in phoronix. Chernbyl area is being partly repopulated because of Ukraine goverment claiming its safety. Does it mean ANYTHING? No. Because:

    a) Goverments wait until the fobia is over to make this kind of announcements, followed by no real data or measurements, because NO goverment would tolerate that a 100sq Km area in their country is gone FOREVER because of an error they did. Radioactivity will stay forever (hundreds of years), but why waiting when you can persuade people to go and live there once the fobia is over?

    b) Birds are the happiest animals with radioctivity, they are almost the only kind of animal surviving without any problem in the Cernobyl area. That's reassuring, isn't it?

    c) Radioctivity after a nuclear station failure will stay in the area forever (with forever, I mean longer than you, your sons and the sons of your sons can ever live). Hope someone builds a nuclear station 20kms from your house so you see how it feels. Would you still be worried by coal pullution? Will coal pollution ever destroy (forever) a 100sq Km area in your country? EVER.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    174

    Default

    There is ionizing radiation all around us and has always been. Cosmic radiation from supernovae, ultraviolet radiation from sun, radiation from naturally occurring radioactive elements - its all been there throughout the evolution of life and humans. We evolved with ionizing radiation and our cells are adapted to it. As a matter of fact it is likely that too little radiation is also harmful.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    115

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by misiu_mp View Post
    There is ionizing radiation all around us and has always been. Cosmic radiation from supernovae, ultraviolet radiation from sun, radiation from naturally occurring radioactive elements - its all been there throughout the evolution of life and humans. We evolved with ionizing radiation and our cells are adapted to it. As a matter of fact it is likely that too little radiation is also harmful.
    Haha true... just like our [fairly good] but over sanitized lifestyle has made us more vulnerable and less resistant to illnesses

  7. #17
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    33

    Default

    Another thread by Qaridarium that gives me a sore face and palm!

    You obviously read too much into the media. For the very few nuclear accidents that have happened.... ever, there have been very few actual deaths caused. A lot more people are, and have been, affected by the coal industry that will take over in Germany now.

    Coal burning actually releases more radioactive isotopes into the atmosphere than nuclear power. As an example uranium-235 is usually found in coal mines and it gets mined, burnt, and vaporised into the atmosphere for you to inhale! Nice!

    Qaridarium, just please tighten up that strap on your tinfoil hat!

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by misiu_mp View Post
    There is ionizing radiation all around us and has always been. Cosmic radiation from supernovae, ultraviolet radiation from sun, radiation from naturally occurring radioactive elements - its all been there throughout the evolution of life and humans. We evolved with ionizing radiation and our cells are adapted to it. As a matter of fact it is likely that too little radiation is also harmful.

    Ridiculous argument. Since there's always been radiations, and too little is dangerous, why not having too much? Yes, why not, maybe even for the next 1000 years, at least we are DEAD SURE of us and our children not having too little..

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    21

    Default

    For the very few nuclear accidents that have happened....
    Of consequences lasting for a thousand years.. yes, just like with coal mines.

    Coal burning actually releases more radioactive isotopes into the atmosphere than nuclear power. As an example uranium-235 is usually found in coal mines and it gets mined, burnt, and vaporised into the atmosphere for you to inhale! Nice!
    Yes, but is coal burning known for contaminations of huge areas that can never EVER be sanitized again? NO.

    Also, are coal mines releasing more radioactive isotopes into atmosphere than a failed nuclear station? No. Than a working one? Maybe (I believe you). But do they produce a nuclear waste that is unclearly handled by mafias all over the world and trown nobody knows where? No.

    Anyway, coal burning, like nuclear power, is not the way to go, but people talk about solar and wind energy like something doomed to NEVER be able to satisfy a nation's power needs, probably assuming that scientific research and improvements are only happening in the nuclear world. But this doesn't make any sense.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Arctic circle, Finland
    Posts
    271

    Default

    You got more radiation sitting in aeroplane over 10km than living next to nuclear powerplant.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •