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:6,583 / 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?

  #31 (permalink)
Site Administrator
Manta, Ecuador
 
Futures Experience: Advanced
Platform: My own custom solution
Favorite Futures: E-mini ES S&P 500
 
Big Mike's Avatar
 
Posts: 46,238 since Jun 2009
Thanks: 29,350 given, 83,219 received

One word. Conservation.

Mike

Due to time constraints, please do not PM me if your question can be resolved or answered on the forum.

Need help?
1) Stop changing things. No new indicators, charts, or methods. Be consistent with what is in front of you first.
2) Start a journal and post to it daily with the trades you made to show your strengths and weaknesses.
3) Set goals for yourself to reach daily. Make them about how you trade, not how much money you make.
4) Accept responsibility for your actions. Stop looking elsewhere to explain away poor performance.
5) Where to start as a trader? Watch this webinar and read this thread for hundreds of questions and answers.
6)
Help using the forum? Watch this video to learn general tips on using the site.

If you want
to support our community, become an Elite Member.

Reply With Quote
The following 2 users say Thank You to Big Mike for this post:
 
  #32 (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

See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil


Quoting 
EVEN if you lose coolant to spent fuel pools, the heat generated is much easier to contain than a reactor with fresh fuel.

Proving that the quoted party has absolutely not the slightest understanding of nuclear reactions and cannot be taken seriously. New fuel rod assemblies are only mildly radioactive and throw off negligible amounts of heat before being placed in a reactor. Exposure to the neutron flux of the chain reaction transforms this relatively harmless mixture of a few different compounds into a witches' brew of unnatural radioisotopes of varying half life. That's how it turns into what they call HIGH LEVEL NUCLEAR WASTE.

Apparently your education in nuclear physics, physical chemistry, heat transfer and thermodynamics as provided by Fox News, your business or law school, or your own wishful thinking had a few holes in it. People with no understanding of science are unqualified to make life or death decisions regarding its use.

If you lose the coolant in a spent fuel pool, the fuel elements melt, drop to the bottom of the pool, and coalesce into globs that can reach critical mass, known as prompt criticality. As opposed to prompt stupidity. In other words, intermittent nuclear chain reactions resume in the dry fuel pool , which is now exposed to the open air. As is happening right now at Fukushima.

Learn more here, from a REAL nuclear engineer :http://www.fairewinds.com/


Last edited by Zondor; June 28th, 2011 at 10:28 PM.
Reply With Quote
 
  #33 (permalink)
Fortitudo et Honor
Austin, TX
 
Futures Experience: Advanced
Platform: TradeStation
Favorite Futures: Futures
 
Posts: 882 since Mar 2011
Thanks: 128 given, 703 received



Zondor View Post
Proving that the quoted party has absolutely not the slightest understanding of nuclear reactions and cannot be taken seriously. New fuel rod assemblies are only mildly radioactive and throw off negligible amounts of heat before being placed in a reactor. Exposure to the neutron flux of the chain reaction transforms this relatively harmless mixture of a few different compounds into a witches' brew of unnatural radioisotopes of varying half life. That's how it turns into what they call HIGH LEVEL NUCLEAR WASTE.

Apparently your education in nuclear physics and thermodynamics as provided by Fox News, your business or law school, or your own imagination had a few holes in it. People with no understanding of science are unqualified to make life or death decisions regarding its use.

If you lose the coolant in a spent fuel pool, the fuel elements melt, drop to the bottom of the pool, and coalesce into globs that can reach critical mass, known as prompt criticality. As opposed to prompt stupidity. In other words, intermittent nuclear chain reactions resume in the dry fuel pool , which is now exposed to the open air. As is happening right now at Fukushima.

Like I said earlier, the proof unfortunately for you is in the pudding. You can claim that flying is unnatural and that planes are dangerous but after millions of successful flights, at some point, you accept the reality.

You can claim that nuclear power is unsafe, but the facts and the numbers vehemently disagree with you.

The tragedy in Japan was an Earthquake...and as I said, you don't build nuclear plants in an EQ zone. (or a flood zone).

If you were to chart the risks your average person endures on any timeframe, daily, monthly, yearly, lifetime, etc....

There's mountains of other things that present higher risks than nuclear energy.

You can't argue with facts. If it's such a huge risk....then why aren't there more incidents? If it's SUCH a huge risk, then why can't you quote anything other than Chernobyl (which happened 3 decades ago), 3 Mile and Fukushima? If it's SUCH a huge risk......then as I said. What exactly is your solution for ridding us of this evil/harmful energy sector?

Reply With Quote
 
  #34 (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


Quoting 
You can't argue with facts. If it's such a huge risk....then why aren't there more incidents? If it's SUCH a huge risk, then why can't you quote anything other than Chernobyl (which happened 3 decades ago), 3 Mile and Fukushima? If it's SUCH a huge risk......then as I said. What exactly is your solution for ridding us of this evil/harmful energy sector?

After having all of your "facts" demolished, simply shift the argument to whatever you want to argue about and make me responsible for stating alternatives to a disastrous and failed energy policy that seems to be making home grown catastrophes inevitable as the Energy Department rubber stamps license extensions of plants that have exceeded their calculated design life.

You lose.

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


Zondor View Post
After having all of your "facts" demolished, simply shift the argument to whatever you want to argue about and make me responsible for stating alternatives to a disastrous and failed energy policy that seems to be making home grown catastrophes inevitable as the Energy Department rubber stamps license extensions of plants that have exceeded their calculated design life.

You lose.

No no. I'm agreeing with you. Nuclear power is awful and dangerous. No what? You tell us. What would be your solution? What would the world be like if Zonder was in charge?

Anyone can throw **** against a wall and see if it sticks. Tell us what your solution would be.

The reason I ask, is that once you go down that path, you'll see that nuclear power isn't so awful after all.

Again, I speak in facts that you can't refute. Show me where all these deaths have resulted from this evil and corrupted system you speak about. Show us.

Your argument is akin to arguing that flying is inherently dangerous and if you fly often enough, a plane will crash. And that's true. There's bound to be accidents and incidents with nuclear power.

But the reality is the incident rate AND the death toll from nuclear power is miniscule compared to any viable alternatives.

So unless you can present a viable, realistic alternative....I'm not sure what the point of this whole thread is.

You're claiming it's such a huge risk, so tell us all what the alternative solution that would be less risky would be.

Reply With Quote
 
  #36 (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

10 mile evacuation zone around Ft Calhoun nuclear disaster area in Nebraska

RM99, why exactly am I obligated to tell "us" how to solve these problems that are not of my making? Did I ever claim to have a solution to this problem? Unhampered by any understanding of scientific principles whatsoever, what solutions would YOU like to suggest, perhaps based on magic, or religion, or perhaps the religion of money and the "free market"? RM99, there seems to be plenty of bad news about how dangerous this all is, so where is your imaginary good news about how WELL MANAGED and SAFE it is? Are you in Public Relations, by any chance?

Radiation Detected In Fukushima Children Urine Samples As Fort Calhoun Orders 10 Mile Evacuation Radius | zero hedge

Maybe we can get some reliable information from... Russian TV!

Ft. Calhoun nuclear plant safety under scrutiny — RT


Uh oh, Associated Press investigation shows that the whole fleet of decrepit, past end of useful life, 1960's era US nuclear plants is a disaster waiting to happen:

US heading toward nuclear disaster — RT



Quoting 
The AP reviewed tens of thousands of pages of government and industry studies, alongside interviews and inspection reports that go back to the 1970s. As a result of the analysis, the AP says that are led to believe that the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission has regularly lessened restrictions as the NRC repeatedly argues that “safety margins could be eased without peril.” The AP responds that not only is the safety of much of America in danger, however, but the investigation also says that billions of dollars are at stake—as well as around one-fifth of America’s electricity supply.
Many of the problems that the AP identified could eventually lead to a nuclear disaster of epic proportions. Their report says that “thousands” of problems linked to aging were uncovered, including many instrumental components of facilities in less-than-stellar condition. In one example, it notes that leakage seeping through busted valves can today exceed up to 20 times the original limit. And as problems abound, the AP notes that no single official body in government or industry has studied the frequency in breakdowns in recent years while all the while NRC has extended licenses on dozens of reactors. The report says that 82 of America’s operating reactors are more than 25 years old, with 66 units having been re-licensed for an additional two decades. The report argues, though, that many of these facilities were built with the intention of new, updated facilities replacing them long before they would reach this condition.



Last edited by Zondor; June 30th, 2011 at 11:19 PM. Reason: correction of subject-predicate conflict
Reply With Quote
The following user says Thank You to Zondor for this post:
 
  #37 (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

And the spin goes on...la di da di da..

Revealed: British government's plan to play down Fukushima | Environment | The Guardian

"The NIA did not comment directly on the emails. "We are funded by our member companies to represent their commercial interests and further the compelling case for new nuclear build in the UK," said the association's spokesman...."

.

Every moment I wake up I realize I know nothing, and then I smile...
Reply With Quote
 
  #38 (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

Here's a nice little musical number

YouTube - ‪Working at a nuclear power plant‬‏

Reply With Quote
 
  #39 (permalink)
Market Wizard
Bangkok
 
Futures Experience: Intermediate
Platform: MultiCharts.NET, S5, Ninj
Broker/Data: AMP, S5, IB
Favorite Futures: ES
 
DionysusToast's Avatar
 
Posts: 2,669 since Nov 2010
Thanks: 776 given, 8,721 received
Forum Reputation: Legendary

Just a thought here...

What part of the planet is there that could NOT face a catastrophic earthquake?

I know some areas are prone - I used to live in Japan - but are any areas immune?

Reply With Quote
 
  #40 (permalink)
Trading for Fun
New Zealand
 
Futures Experience: Intermediate
Platform: Mac OS X
Broker/Data: MB Trading/AMP/LMAX
Favorite Futures: SL-1210 M5G
 
Posts: 72 since Jun 2011
Thanks: 2 given, 31 received


A lot of modern technology when they were first introduced were unreliable, dangerous and environmentally polluting. Planes, cars and medicines are all fine examples.

Nuclear energy is no different.

The one thing though is that nuclear energy has not had the chance is to develop into a safer and more environmentally friendly technology.

Legislation, lobbying and ignorance has prevented commercial interests from developing nuclear energy and providing incentives to R&D to make fission reactors safer.

Without the support of competitive interests to develop nuclear and make it a more competitive product over time the current situation can only lead to serious nuclear disasters in the future.

Using the US as an example, the reactors are ageing, they are based on old technology and instead of being replaced with newer, safer reactors they are just left as the status quo. We know the old reactors are dangerous but are kept operating instead of being replaced.

I wouldn't want to be in an accident inside an old car from the 70's. I'd want safety features of modern cars like air bags, ABS brakes, door side bars etc. Why is anyone surprised that a nuclear reactor like Fukushima, built in the 70's, has had the shit hit the fan?

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)

Linda Bradford Raschke: Reading The Tape

Elite only

Adam Grimes: TBA

Elite only

NinjaTrader: TBA

January

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 08:29 AM.

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 2017-12-12 in 0.17 seconds with 20 queries on phoenix via your IP 54.90.207.75