Nuclear Power Fanboys Take Note - Fuksushima on the Missouri River? - Off-Topic | futures io social day trading
futures io futures trading


Nuclear Power Fanboys Take Note - Fuksushima on the Missouri River?
Updated: Views / Replies:6,585 / 88
Created: by Zondor Attachments:1

Welcome to futures io.

(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)

futures io is the largest futures trading community on the planet, with over 90,000 members. At futures io, our goal has always been and always will be to create a friendly, positive, forward-thinking community where members can openly share and discuss everything the world of trading has to offer. The community is one of the friendliest you will find on any subject, with members going out of their way to help others. Some of the primary differences between futures io and other trading sites revolve around the standards of our community. Those standards include a code of conduct for our members, as well as extremely high standards that govern which partners we do business with, and which products or services we recommend to our members.

At futures io, our focus is on quality education. No hype, gimmicks, or secret sauce. The truth is: trading is hard. To succeed, you need to surround yourself with the right support system, educational content, and trading mentors – all of which you can find on futures io, utilizing our social trading environment.

With futures io, you can find honest trading reviews on brokers, trading rooms, indicator packages, trading strategies, and much more. Our trading review process is highly moderated to ensure that only genuine users are allowed, so you don’t need to worry about fake reviews.

We are fundamentally different than most other trading sites:
  • We are here to help. Just let us know what you need.
  • We work extremely hard to keep things positive in our community.
  • We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts.
  • We firmly believe in and encourage sharing. The holy grail is within you, we can help you find it.
  • We expect our members to participate and become a part of the community. Help yourself by helping others.

You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community.  It's free and simple.

-- Big Mike, Site Administrator

Reply
 1  
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
 

Nuclear Power Fanboys Take Note - Fuksushima on the Missouri River?

  #11 (permalink)
Elite Member
UK London
 
Futures Experience: None
Platform: NT and XTrader
Favorite Futures: Piano
 
Posts: 1,358 since Sep 2009
Thanks: 1,356 given, 1,551 received

An interesting documentary and reminder of Chernobyl.
How many really knew how serious it was...and how many really know how serious it is.

Seems an awfully big risk just to make a lot of steam !


Every moment I wake up I realize I know nothing, and then I smile...
Reply With Quote
 
  #12 (permalink)
Elite Member
Aurora, Il USA
 
Futures Experience: Advanced
Platform: TradeStation
Favorite Futures: futures
 
kbit's Avatar
 
Posts: 5,872 since Nov 2010
Thanks: 3,301 given, 3,332 received


monpere View Post
I think all nuclear power plants are just time bombs waiting to detonate. We just don't have the knowledge or technology to contain them when things go wrong. Was the devastation of Chernobyl worth the years of cheap power it provided? When a meltdown occurs, all of a sudden the brilliant engineers who designed the plant, are coming up with brilliant ideas like using shredded newspaper, sawdust and super glue to plug up cracks in a reactor that is melting down!, ask TEPCO. We just don't have the means to deal with these kinds of extra ordinary consequences of the technology. If you are gonna build a car that can go 250 miles an hour, you should know how to build the brakes to stop it as well, as it approaches a cliff.

I think you will have a different perspective if/when one of the nuclear power plants near you has an accident, and you have to evacuate your family, and 6 months later your kids start developing obscure heath issues that your doctors have no idea how to deal with.


Yeah I know what your saying but, I think looking forward we have to deal with practical reality...what will you replace them with ? I don't see future reactors being as dangerous as you suggest, could there be a accident...sure. Then the question becomes how bad and so forth. I guess we have to weigh the benefit to the cost(being potential disaster of some kind). I don't know what the answer is...wind and solar are impractical, can't have hydroelectric in areas that have no water, coal is offensive to the global warming people.etc...

Reply With Quote
 
  #13 (permalink)
Elite Member
Portland Oregon, United States
 
Futures Experience: Beginner
Platform: Ninjatrader®
Broker/Data: CQG, Kinetick
Favorite Futures: Gameplay Klownbine® Trading of Globex
 
Zondor's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,327 since Jul 2009
Thanks: 1,246 given, 2,635 received

Privatize the Profits and Socialize the Risk


The Unraveling of Nuclear Energy

Nobody wants it except those who profit from it... and the Fanboys and ignoramii.

And maybe any Space Aliens such as Emperor Ming The Merciless, Ruler of the Universe® who might want humans to become extinct.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzVhPTw1GiY

Reply With Quote
 
  #14 (permalink)
Fortitudo et Honor
Austin, TX
 
Futures Experience: Advanced
Platform: TradeStation
Favorite Futures: Futures
 
Posts: 882 since Mar 2011
Thanks: 128 given, 703 received

Firstly, it takes a little more than a loss of power to reach a "meltdown."

There are concepts in inherent design here at play that would literally take weeks to explain.

The reactor in Japan was/is a Boiling Water Reactor (GE) and the reactor in Omaha is a Pressurized Water Reactor.

Both are similar in design, but the PWR has a separate cooling/electrical generation system (separated by a series of heat exchangers).

Comparing either of these to Chernobyl is simply ignorant. Chernobyl was a high temperature gas reactor.

In the simplest terms....in a gas reactor, the moderator (a key component of the fission reaction) is large amounts of carbon. The coolant (which is separate), typically Helium, serves to cool the reactor, but the reaction is independent of the coolant.

In lightwater reactors (BWR and PWR) the coolant and the moderator are the same. That way, if there's a loss of coolant, there's a corresponding loss of reaction.

We saw this concept play out at 3mile, where the reactor containment held and the inherent design actually did it's job. 3Mile was/is seen as a failure to opponents, but it's actually a success story. It showed we could have a catastrophic failure and NOT have a total meltdown and rupture of the containment.

Reply With Quote
 
  #15 (permalink)
Fortitudo et Honor
Austin, TX
 
Futures Experience: Advanced
Platform: TradeStation
Favorite Futures: Futures
 
Posts: 882 since Mar 2011
Thanks: 128 given, 703 received

Some other facts to ponder.

1) Coal fired plants release more radioactive waste than nuclear plants. The radioactive components contained in coal (K, Potassium) and such, are released, even after "scrubbing."

2) More people die in a single year from the entire process of coal fired electricity than have died in the entire history of nuclear power. Soak that in.....

There are thousands of plants operating around the world and have been for decades. It's LITERALLY to the point where picketers and protestors give up after 30 years of living next to nuke plants.

3) We don't even harness the full potential of nuclear power (breeding reactors) because we have a fear of creating weapons grade fissile materials. The US currently has a policy against breeder reactors which produce Plutonium and other fuel grades which can be then used in other plants......

Our current state of nuclear power extracts approximately 1 percent of the available energy out of the fissionable material. Breeding reactors extract orders of magnitude more. You could chalk that up to a unfortunate reality.

4) Obviously, coal not only produces more radiation, but also produces more sulfates and nitrates (acid rain) but massive amounts of greenhouse emissions (CO2). The thermal pollution is comparable to nuclear.

Nuclear power produces spent fuel rods (usually locked in casks) which are politically sensitive.....kinda like prisons. Everyone wants criminals in jail, but no one wants a prison in their neighborhood.

5) The harvesting of natural gas and coal are 1000x more disruptive to the environment than harvesting of fissionable materials (Uranium). The typical chemical reaction is on the order of 6KeV. The typical nuclear reaction is on the order of 200MeV. Essentially, you get a lot more "bang/buck" in terms of weight or volume with nuclear reactions.

Reply With Quote
The following user says Thank You to RM99 for this post:
 
  #16 (permalink)
Fortitudo et Honor
Austin, TX
 
Futures Experience: Advanced
Platform: TradeStation
Favorite Futures: Futures
 
Posts: 882 since Mar 2011
Thanks: 128 given, 703 received

lastly,

I'll add, that the largest threat to our planet isn't pollution....it isn't greenhouse gases or global warming (at least not directly).

The largest threat to our planet is uncontrolled human population.

Given that we're not going to "solve" that issue (or even address it) anytime soon (probably not until it's way too late)....

The ONLY viable energy source (to meet exponentially growing demand) long term is a Nuclear solution.

That solution is most likely NOT fission.

Assuming that fusion is possible.....(and we're getting closer and closer every day to a useful, practical and viable fusion solution), the industry/market that's going to get us there is primarily nuclear.

We don't get advancements in fusion technology out of alternative energy solutions. We get them through the continued experience and research involved and resulting from our collective history of nuclear power.

Reply With Quote
 
  #17 (permalink)
Elite Member
Bala, PA, USA
 
Futures Experience: Intermediate
Platform: NinjaTrader
Broker/Data: Mirus, IB
Favorite Futures: SPY, Oil, Euro
 
monpere's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,858 since Jul 2010
Thanks: 300 given, 3,276 received


RM99 View Post
lastly,

I'll add, that the largest threat to our planet isn't pollution....it isn't greenhouse gases or global warming (at least not directly).

The largest threat to our planet is uncontrolled human population.

Given that we're not going to "solve" that issue (or even address it) anytime soon (probably not until it's way too late)....

The ONLY viable energy source (to meet exponentially growing demand) long term is a Nuclear solution.

That solution is most likely NOT fission.

Assuming that fusion is possible.....(and we're getting closer and closer every day to a useful, practical and viable fusion solution), the industry/market that's going to get us there is primarily nuclear.

We don't get advancements in fusion technology out of alternative energy solutions. We get them through the continued experience and research involved and resulting from our collective history of nuclear power.

I'm no nuclear engineer, but using shredded newspaper to contain a catastrophic nuclear event does not foster feelings of confidence for me in the industry. I'm no fan of coal power either, but until the nuclear industry can instill that confidence in general public, it is going to scare the pants off of the layman.

Reply With Quote
 
  #18 (permalink)
Elite Member
Springfield
 
Futures Experience: Intermediate
Platform: Ninjatrader, TOS
Favorite Futures: eMicros
 
Posts: 126 since Sep 2009
Thanks: 10 given, 78 received


zt379 View Post
An interesting documentary and reminder of Chernobyl.
How many really knew how serious it was...and how many really know how serious it is.

Seems an awfully big risk just to make a lot of steam !



"This medal is for the 50 yard dash and this medal is for the high jump, and...

Reply With Quote
 
  #19 (permalink)
Fortitudo et Honor
Austin, TX
 
Futures Experience: Advanced
Platform: TradeStation
Favorite Futures: Futures
 
Posts: 882 since Mar 2011
Thanks: 128 given, 703 received


zxxaxz View Post
"This medal is for the 50 yard dash and this medal is for the high jump, and...

Again, you're comparing FUNDAMENTALLY different designs.

There were some HUGE differences in the design between the HTGR and the light water reactors used by the West.

In an HTGR, the coolant (Helium) flows through the reactor which is being moderated by Carbon. "Moderated" isn't the term you would think it to be. In nuke terms, "moderated" means that the emitted nuetrons are "moderated" or slowed to the point where they can successfully split the fuel atoms. If the nuetrons are too fast, they don't work.

In the case of Chernobyl, you had a situation akin to a person who uses their right foot to step on the gas and their left foot to step on the brake. You have a scenario where it's possible to both step on the gas AND the brake at the same time.

In the light water reactors.....it's akin to the one legged driver ONLY using their right foot. In order to step on the brake, they HAVE to remove their foot from the accelerator to brake.

When you remove the coolant from a BWR/PWR, the reaction begins to immediately subside and the residual energy released, decays.

Now, obviously a sudden or acute loss of coolant is still not good, as the latent energy released will overheat components and begin a "meltdown" but the reaction is waning. THAT is exactly what happened at 3 Mile. Instead of having to spend days/weeks dumping Boride on the reactor with helicopters, like at Chernobyl.

There's other ineherent safety features as well. In western modern reactors, the "control rods" aka the brakes which stop the reaction are suspended from above, so a loss in power means that gravity pulls the control rods fully into place.

Reply With Quote
 
  #20 (permalink)
Fortitudo et Honor
Austin, TX
 
Futures Experience: Advanced
Platform: TradeStation
Favorite Futures: Futures
 
Posts: 882 since Mar 2011
Thanks: 128 given, 703 received


The catastrophe in Japan was due largely in part to the fact that they cannot place the reactor in a seizmicly stable area. The entire country is an Earthquake zone. I don't care how robust you build a structure, the right size Earthquake is going to have everyone singing the blues.

Ask yourself how many people have died at Fossil power plants....it's 1000x more than nuclear plants. We've been operating nuclear plants for decades without significant incident.

There's literally SO MUCH regulation that it's now making nuclear power economically disadvantaged. The cost to open a new nuke plant is astronomical. One retard who wants to do an "environmental" study to determine if some obscure rodent or insect is going to be harmed can delay or stop construction of new plants. Building them is a VERY risky venture (financially) because it's such a politically sensitive issue.

In the end, the benefits greatly outweigh the alternatives. For every person that's died from a Nuclear accident, there are literally THOUSANDS that die from coal mining operations, fuel oil refining, coal and diesel plant accidents, etc, etc, etc.

Reply With Quote

Reply



futures io > > > Nuclear Power Fanboys Take Note - Fuksushima on the Missouri River?

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Upcoming Webinars and Events (4:30PM ET unless noted)

Jigsaw Trading: TBA

Elite only

FuturesTrader71: TBA

Elite only

NinjaTrader: TBA

Jan 18

RandBots: TBA

Jan 23

GFF Brokers & CME Group: Futures & Bitcoin

Elite only

Adam Grimes: TBA

Elite only

Ran Aroussi: TBA

Elite only
     

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Exxon oil spill in Mont. river prompts evacuations kbit News and Current Events 0 July 2nd, 2011 09:58 PM
Missouri disaster Eric j Off-Topic 0 May 23rd, 2011 05:50 PM
Nuclear Power Fears at New Heights Despite Safety, Viability Quick Summary News and Current Events 0 April 11th, 2011 11:00 PM
note over bond sam028 Terms (Glossary) 0 January 7th, 2011 06:55 PM
A note of Thanks Ausy Mick Off-Topic 2 July 5th, 2009 03:02 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:51 PM.

Copyright © 2017 by futures io, s.a., Av Ricardo J. Alfaro, Century Tower, Panama, +507 833-9432, info@futures.io
All information is for educational use only and is not investment advice.
There is a substantial risk of loss in trading commodity futures, stocks, options and foreign exchange products. Past performance is not indicative of future results.
no new posts
Page generated 2017-12-14 in 0.16 seconds with 20 queries on phoenix via your IP 54.221.73.186