Weren't there scientists saying that the world would end because of the formation of black holes once the LHC got started up? I was reminded of that the other week while driving through a tunnel near it between Italy and France.
What happened to the Large Hadron Collider doomsday people?
- Thread starter billyfsu76
- Start date
It did go wrong, and spun off parallel universes, and threw some of us from one into another. It's a real mess. The Bernstein Bears Conundrum proves it.
http://woodbetweenworlds.blogspot.com/2012/08/the-berenstein-bears-we-are-living-in.html
http://woodbetweenworlds.blogspot.com/2012/08/the-berenstein-bears-we-are-living-in.html
reed, just pointing out that overreaction is not limited to the right. not sure how old you are, but the pic i posted is from the environmental overreaction film China Syndrome (1979 - Jane Fonda, Jack Lemon, Michael Douglas, Wilfred Brimley).
it was films like this after Three Mile Island that killed nuclear in the U.S. (but not France). ironically, grenhouse gas emissions might be much less today if folks had ignored the greens and embraced nuclear like the French did.
it was films like this after Three Mile Island that killed nuclear in the U.S. (but not France). ironically, grenhouse gas emissions might be much less today if folks had ignored the greens and embraced nuclear like the French did.
I'm 43 and yes, I've seen China Syndrome more times than I can count..........and what killed nuclear in the US is not those movies, but the Chernobyl disaster. In my 'Global Climate Change' class at FSU we had a guess speaker from the NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) who went into detail about the whole situation.
And the French nuclear situation isn't as great as it seems, they pump a lot of radioactive water into the North sea and send nearly all their waste to Russia who in no way deposes of it properly. The ONLY thing that France did correctly was to use the same exact system for every reactor.
The True Costs of French Nuclear Power
And the French nuclear situation isn't as great as it seems, they pump a lot of radioactive water into the North sea and send nearly all their waste to Russia who in no way deposes of it properly. The ONLY thing that France did correctly was to use the same exact system for every reactor.
The True Costs of French Nuclear Power
how come Chernobly didn't affect the French nuke industry? They have the lowest carbon footprint of the developed countries.
i find it hard to believe they are pumping radiation into the North Sea-you do know the water is for cooling only, right? Couldn't they send the hot stuff to Russia too?
i find it hard to believe they are pumping radiation into the North Sea-you do know the water is for cooling only, right? Couldn't they send the hot stuff to Russia too?
It's not from the cooling water...........it's water from reprocessing the nuclear material. Here are the pertinent details
Nuclear Power and France: Setting the Record Straight
Thorium Power Is the Safer Future of Nuclear Energy
Nuclear Power and France: Setting the Record Straight
- France reprocesses reactor fuel at the vast La Hague facility on the Normandy coast. The so-called low-level liquid wastes from reprocessing are discharged into the English Channel and into the air. However, these “low-level” wastes still contain highly radioactive and often long-lived isotopes. Dumping these same wastes into the sea in containers would violate the1970 London Dumping Convention.
- The liquid discharges from La Hague (and the UK. reprocessing plant at Sellafield) have resulted in contamination of area beaches and of seas as far as away as the Arctic Circle and are considered among the ten main anthropogenic sources of radioactive pollution of the world’s oceans.3
- The nuclear waste pumped into the sea from La Hague has been measured as 17 million times more radioactive than normal sea water according to an analysis by an independent French radiological laboratory.
- Ninety-five percent of the mass of spent reactor fuel is uranium, contaminated with traces of fission products, plutonium and other radioactive materials. This contamination makes re-enrichment complex and costly. Therefore it is not re-used as fuel. Instead, France sends this contaminated uranium to Russia.9
Thorium Power Is the Safer Future of Nuclear Energy
PSR, lol. you couldn't find a Greenpeace memo or UN charter?
nuclear, even the French way, is orders of magnitude cleaner than conventional when you look all in - extraction, middle east politics, cost of military support, etc.
thorium has potential but no one is doing it on a commercial level today (or ever has).
anyway, I was just responding to the trolling from your original post, that religious people were crazy for thinking something unexpected might happen from CERN. Its the same theme that was applauded in the China Syndrome (Chernobyl and Fukashima proved they were wrong) and its the same theme underlying unproven global warming claims - the damage might be irreversible, so we need to limit carbon energy - ignoring the fact that the planet is now cooling. I don't know enough about CERN to comment, but the people you are lampooning seem to have the same attitude as the climate change alarmists - the potential damage might be irreversible, so we need to prohibit it.
nuclear, even the French way, is orders of magnitude cleaner than conventional when you look all in - extraction, middle east politics, cost of military support, etc.
thorium has potential but no one is doing it on a commercial level today (or ever has).
anyway, I was just responding to the trolling from your original post, that religious people were crazy for thinking something unexpected might happen from CERN. Its the same theme that was applauded in the China Syndrome (Chernobyl and Fukashima proved they were wrong) and its the same theme underlying unproven global warming claims - the damage might be irreversible, so we need to limit carbon energy - ignoring the fact that the planet is now cooling. I don't know enough about CERN to comment, but the people you are lampooning seem to have the same attitude as the climate change alarmists - the potential damage might be irreversible, so we need to prohibit it.
I don't even believe that Climate Change is the real elephant in the room.....that's ocean acidification (and it's just basic chemistry), but statements like this are so easy to dispute.
June 2015 also marks the fourth month this year that has broken its monthly temperature record, along with February, March, and May. The other months of 2015 were not far behind: January was second warmest for its respective month and April was third warmest. These six warm months combined with the previous six months (four of which were also record warm) to make the period July 2014–June 2015 the warmest 12-month period in the 136-year period of record, surpassing the previous record set just last month (June 2014–May 2015).
Last edited:
The one thing I will agree with you on, somewhat.......but the US would need to figure out how to SAFELY dispose of the waste, which is one thing the French are not doing.
eh....The BBC article you linked was interesting, but didn't match the quacks you linked in the others. There's all sort of quackery and certainly much quackery within the religious realm. However, what serious teacher, preacher, leader, or theologian jumped on this doomsday myth? No offense intended here, but you painted with too large a brush-stroke when you stated "I remember the religious people freaking out."
There were "religious people freaking out" over the Hale-Bopp comet years ago ..... but they were a small group of crack-pots and weirdos....a cult.
But leaving that behind, what are your thoughts about that 2012 CERN conference with philosophers and theologians? Last year I took part in similar talks with scientists in Atlanta.
EDIT: I did a Google search and yes, there's a lot of religious crack pots weaving September conspiracy-theory-like threads. However, it seems to me that the internet has a way of skewing things. Crackpots the world over (of any variety) have found an outlet to make their voices heard. And, because of the medium itself, it's difficult to tell whether their cacophony is truly representative or simply marginal. Anyway, after seeing the nonsense for myself, I better understand your statement. Cheers!
There were "religious people freaking out" over the Hale-Bopp comet years ago ..... but they were a small group of crack-pots and weirdos....a cult.
But leaving that behind, what are your thoughts about that 2012 CERN conference with philosophers and theologians? Last year I took part in similar talks with scientists in Atlanta.
EDIT: I did a Google search and yes, there's a lot of religious crack pots weaving September conspiracy-theory-like threads. However, it seems to me that the internet has a way of skewing things. Crackpots the world over (of any variety) have found an outlet to make their voices heard. And, because of the medium itself, it's difficult to tell whether their cacophony is truly representative or simply marginal. Anyway, after seeing the nonsense for myself, I better understand your statement. Cheers!
Last edited:
what is your definition of safe? compare french deaths from nuclear to u.s. deaths from carbon pollution. its not even close if frame the question correctly.
Not introducing any cobalt-58, cobalt-60, iodine-131, cesium-134 and/or cesium-137 radioactivity straight into the environment, granted none have a half life longer than 30 years. And considering said emissions are increasing each year then those short half life's are moot, and usually the shorter the half life the higher the radioactive damage from the
And yet, with all those nuclear reactors French CO2 emissions are on the rise also, and it's a little known fact that the French design has a major fault.........during the 2003 drought France lost ~25% of nuclear power output due to the extreme low levels of water in the rivers.
And considering that only ~35% of US carbon emissions is from electrical power production, then it would take more than just building a lot of nuclear power plants.
With that said, this could be a game changer (too bad the US allowed big business to kill the electric car).
The UK is testing a new road surface that charges your electric car as you drive
And let me clarify, I'm all for Nuclear power generation, but if we are going to do it.........let's do it as smart as possible, and that's not the French way.
