Geologically unstable? Is there major active faults around the site? Or is it just a problem with slope stability of various hills in the area? If slope stability is the issue, as long as nearby hills have been proven stable or that any potential mass wasting that occurs will not reach the reactors and cooling systems, what is the issue?
Why doesn't anyone connected with nuclear power ever mention that we will be creating highly dangerous waste that we will have to put somewhere for tens of thousands of years? Figure out a way to process the waste so you wouldn't mind having it dumped in your back yard and then come back and talk to us. This idea is right up there with the Republican initiative to sell unpasteurized milk to Minnesota children at farmers markets! PS: I have worked at the Prairie Island Nuke plant in Minnesota.
No.1 culprit of global warming is livestock industry and amongst of all beef industry is the worst of the worst.
Don't think you can have sensible discussion with beef eating fatty self proclaimed green. You can spot fat around their belly and it is the sign of hypocricy and global warming.
Well that's an anecdote if I ever did hear one. Also how is nuclear power is the most dangerous? Surely CO2's affect on climate is worse. They should be using generation 3+ reactors though.
this is a slow systematic water Polluting technique the Nuclear Power plants do. It's so obvious whey most of them are located near a LAKE, Beach or Oceanside locations???... NO NUKES!
Most nuclear fission plants use the Boiling Water Reactor, which pumps water through a hollow 'skin' surrounding the fission chamber. The water is heated and turns to steam, which spins a turbine, which generates electricity. The water also acts as coolant.
Note that the water does not come into contact with any nuclear material, the two are kept separate, so the water does not carry away any radioactive particles. There's no pollution. Don't talk about stuff you don't understand.
@jimmyboyG485 - first of all the water used in those plants are not guaranteed safe after disposal plus where does it all go after it's cycle? U don't understand the implications nor environmental consequences this bullshit so called clean energy produces. okay if you say so that it's safe, then why don't u go there and drink that water as proof that if its safe you won't need iodine 2 smudge on your neck?!! haven't u seen & learn what is happening to Fukushima Daichi Nuke plant yet? IDIOT!
Are you stupid? Radiation doesn't get stuck in water. Really, there are so many problems with nuclear energy, I could write an essay on why it sucks. But all you do is come up with media-hyped bullshit and the most ridiculous statements I've ever heard. Radiation getting trapped in water? LOL! You should come say that to my Physics class, the reactions would be hilarious.
@jimmyboyG485 - frankly your physics bullshit class doesn't do us any good. i think you should drink the contaminated water off the shore of Fukushima so you stop your miserable logic from proliferating. Radiation does stay in water it also gets airborne your stupid! there had been 4 states in the us already reporting contamination from airborne particles from the Daichi plant. u simply pretend U know shit but U actually Don't! stop going to school so u won't become corrupt & stupid! LOL no nuke
When was I denying that radiation had escaped from the damaged and outdated Japanese reactors? I wasn't. But the fact remains, in a new and functional nuke plant, the water cannot become contaminated. Fact. No arguing there.
@jimmyboyG485 - YOUR STUPID FACT REMAINS TO BE PROVEN! JUST LIKE IN USA - YOUR GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT WTF? LOL... you know what u can do? - create a NUCLEAR LOTION so u can get a toasty tan when u go out in the Sun. no sense arguing with you! GET LOST!
What do you mean, 'not proven'? Do you know what radiation is? Either it's a helium nuclei, an electron or a gamma ray.
Either way, it will either pass through the water and do nothing, or hit a water molecule and either a) lose its energy and become just another harmless random particle or b) impart its energy into the water molecule in the form of heat and disappear. It doesn't think "hey, this water is cool, let's chill here a bit."
@jimmyboyG485 - Nuke Plants might not Emit CO2 but they are more dangerous when they emit Nuclear Radiation or meltdowns. You're the one who doesn't know what your talkin' about! your brain has already been contaminated by Radioactive Isotopes & is Overheating that's why U think out of your ASS! lol..
You sound like a 10-year-old having a temper tantrum. If you want to be taken seriously, calm down for a start, personal insults don't help you.
Nuclear power is statistically the safest method of reliable and feasible energy generation, far better than any fossil fuel.
And I never said anything about CO2 anyway, I was merely countering your ridiculous point that nuclear plants contaminate water 'because they're near a lake or beach' by explaining the real reason for this placement.
@jimmyboyG485 - Dude I don't know what planet u came from but you are lacking a vital organ in your body - A BRAIN! statistically by corporate malfeasance and people with nuclear advocacy standards yes! but ever thought about what happened in Chernobyl? haven't U learned bitter lessons yet in 3 mile island? u must've not been watching whats unfolding in Fukushima Daichi & Daini plants yet? Clean & Feasible MY ASS! nuclear energy by far is the Most Dangerous Toxic & Dangerous kind of Energy STFU!
Have you checked the effects of fossil fuel emissions? They kill so many people, do so much damage, but unfortunately they're silent. It's not like radiation or nuclear accidents, big and definite events the media can splash across our TV screens. But if you actually look at the effect pollution and greenhouse gases are having on our environment, nuclear is tame in comparison. Both are crap, but nuclear is by far the better option out of the two.
@jimmyboyG485 - Your basically prefering the better of 2 evils then? both are Fucked up but Nuclear can Kill billions in an instant so whats tame about that than inhaling CO2 emissions? the only difference is CO2 Emissions can be reduced, even if inhaled thru the years by people it only caters to slow death. damage can be reduced if not stopped once & for all if we can only build electric cars that don't run on Fossil fuels. what a stubborn pretender you are you don't know Jack Shit! go eat meat
@jimmyboyG485 - yous sound like a 9 year old pretending 2 be a 40 old adult with limited capacity! LOL. stop fooling your so called educated mind. U suck & u don't know shit about NUKES! les u want 2 try it for yourself..jeesh... the only Clean & renewable energy that doesn't commit massive global consequences is THE SUN. with enough solar panels & arrays carefully installed on earth, solar power alone is enough to provide limitless power to whole of world. do your research kid! NO NUKES!
Yes, hooray, after about 5 posts you finally say something sensible. Solar. The only problem there is, you also seem to have ignored the landspaces that would have to be covered up, the habitats that would be destroyed, the economic cost - money don't grow on trees. Space solar is the answer, ground-based is simply illogical.
@jimmyboyG485 - well wuts happening at the economic cost this nuke plant in fukushima is doing right now? the wars in Libya, afghanistan, Iraq Cost more than building solar panels! your are an Idiot! jeesh...I said "carefully installed on earth". since when did corporations cared about the environment? your twisted logic is uttermost alarming. haven't we been destroying the earth ever since? so wut habitats destruction are u talkin' about? go rape the brazilian rainforest if your so concerned.
I live in this town in florida and we have a nuclear plant here on the intercoastal and never had a problem with it and during the winter when the water gets realy cold the plant warms up the surronding area of water, without it a lot of manatees would freeze to death.
Brazil is nation with very corrupt politicians. They don't even need that much power in that region. This is all happening because they want to pocket the money that the bank gives them. Lula was a criminal and has left another criminal in charge. There are plans for Russia to build reactors in Brazil. How will all this be stopped? We must make people throw out these corrupt politicans and place a green party there.
Is there radioactivity coming out of that plant? How can we stop them from building more? Can there be protests for going against nuclear power? Thanks.
This has been flagged as spam show
See FUKUSHIMA
They all want electricity - Fast.
After the first accident they are dying - Slowly.
AngelAtomiseur 6 months ago
Comment removed
AngelAtomiseur 6 months ago
Geologically unstable? Is there major active faults around the site? Or is it just a problem with slope stability of various hills in the area? If slope stability is the issue, as long as nearby hills have been proven stable or that any potential mass wasting that occurs will not reach the reactors and cooling systems, what is the issue?
422eng 11 months ago
Why doesn't anyone connected with nuclear power ever mention that we will be creating highly dangerous waste that we will have to put somewhere for tens of thousands of years? Figure out a way to process the waste so you wouldn't mind having it dumped in your back yard and then come back and talk to us. This idea is right up there with the Republican initiative to sell unpasteurized milk to Minnesota children at farmers markets! PS: I have worked at the Prairie Island Nuke plant in Minnesota.
1293drive 1 year ago
Greenpeace activists eat BEEF, guys, BEEF.
No.1 culprit of global warming is livestock industry and amongst of all beef industry is the worst of the worst.
Don't think you can have sensible discussion with beef eating fatty self proclaimed green. You can spot fat around their belly and it is the sign of hypocricy and global warming.
popost22 1 year ago
Well that's an anecdote if I ever did hear one. Also how is nuclear power is the most dangerous? Surely CO2's affect on climate is worse. They should be using generation 3+ reactors though.
IAmNotKira 1 year ago
this is a slow systematic water Polluting technique the Nuclear Power plants do. It's so obvious whey most of them are located near a LAKE, Beach or Oceanside locations???... NO NUKES!
marumito 1 year ago
@marumito
Most nuclear fission plants use the Boiling Water Reactor, which pumps water through a hollow 'skin' surrounding the fission chamber. The water is heated and turns to steam, which spins a turbine, which generates electricity. The water also acts as coolant.
Note that the water does not come into contact with any nuclear material, the two are kept separate, so the water does not carry away any radioactive particles. There's no pollution. Don't talk about stuff you don't understand.
jimmyboyG485 11 months ago
@jimmyboyG485 - first of all the water used in those plants are not guaranteed safe after disposal plus where does it all go after it's cycle? U don't understand the implications nor environmental consequences this bullshit so called clean energy produces. okay if you say so that it's safe, then why don't u go there and drink that water as proof that if its safe you won't need iodine 2 smudge on your neck?!! haven't u seen & learn what is happening to Fukushima Daichi Nuke plant yet? IDIOT!
marumito 11 months ago
@marumito
Are you stupid? Radiation doesn't get stuck in water. Really, there are so many problems with nuclear energy, I could write an essay on why it sucks. But all you do is come up with media-hyped bullshit and the most ridiculous statements I've ever heard. Radiation getting trapped in water? LOL! You should come say that to my Physics class, the reactions would be hilarious.
jimmyboyG485 11 months ago
@jimmyboyG485 - frankly your physics bullshit class doesn't do us any good. i think you should drink the contaminated water off the shore of Fukushima so you stop your miserable logic from proliferating. Radiation does stay in water it also gets airborne your stupid! there had been 4 states in the us already reporting contamination from airborne particles from the Daichi plant. u simply pretend U know shit but U actually Don't! stop going to school so u won't become corrupt & stupid! LOL no nuke
marumito 11 months ago
@marumito
When was I denying that radiation had escaped from the damaged and outdated Japanese reactors? I wasn't. But the fact remains, in a new and functional nuke plant, the water cannot become contaminated. Fact. No arguing there.
jimmyboyG485 11 months ago
@jimmyboyG485 - YOUR STUPID FACT REMAINS TO BE PROVEN! JUST LIKE IN USA - YOUR GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT WTF? LOL... you know what u can do? - create a NUCLEAR LOTION so u can get a toasty tan when u go out in the Sun. no sense arguing with you! GET LOST!
marumito 11 months ago
@marumito
What do you mean, 'not proven'? Do you know what radiation is? Either it's a helium nuclei, an electron or a gamma ray.
Either way, it will either pass through the water and do nothing, or hit a water molecule and either a) lose its energy and become just another harmless random particle or b) impart its energy into the water molecule in the form of heat and disappear. It doesn't think "hey, this water is cool, let's chill here a bit."
Really, this is VERY basic physics.
jimmyboyG485 11 months ago
@jimmyboyG485 - Nuke Plants might not Emit CO2 but they are more dangerous when they emit Nuclear Radiation or meltdowns. You're the one who doesn't know what your talkin' about! your brain has already been contaminated by Radioactive Isotopes & is Overheating that's why U think out of your ASS! lol..
marumito 11 months ago
@marumito
You sound like a 10-year-old having a temper tantrum. If you want to be taken seriously, calm down for a start, personal insults don't help you.
Nuclear power is statistically the safest method of reliable and feasible energy generation, far better than any fossil fuel.
And I never said anything about CO2 anyway, I was merely countering your ridiculous point that nuclear plants contaminate water 'because they're near a lake or beach' by explaining the real reason for this placement.
jimmyboyG485 11 months ago
@jimmyboyG485 - Dude I don't know what planet u came from but you are lacking a vital organ in your body - A BRAIN! statistically by corporate malfeasance and people with nuclear advocacy standards yes! but ever thought about what happened in Chernobyl? haven't U learned bitter lessons yet in 3 mile island? u must've not been watching whats unfolding in Fukushima Daichi & Daini plants yet? Clean & Feasible MY ASS! nuclear energy by far is the Most Dangerous Toxic & Dangerous kind of Energy STFU!
marumito 11 months ago
@marumito
Have you checked the effects of fossil fuel emissions? They kill so many people, do so much damage, but unfortunately they're silent. It's not like radiation or nuclear accidents, big and definite events the media can splash across our TV screens. But if you actually look at the effect pollution and greenhouse gases are having on our environment, nuclear is tame in comparison. Both are crap, but nuclear is by far the better option out of the two.
jimmyboyG485 11 months ago
@jimmyboyG485 - Your basically prefering the better of 2 evils then? both are Fucked up but Nuclear can Kill billions in an instant so whats tame about that than inhaling CO2 emissions? the only difference is CO2 Emissions can be reduced, even if inhaled thru the years by people it only caters to slow death. damage can be reduced if not stopped once & for all if we can only build electric cars that don't run on Fossil fuels. what a stubborn pretender you are you don't know Jack Shit! go eat meat
marumito 11 months ago
@jimmyboyG485 - yous sound like a 9 year old pretending 2 be a 40 old adult with limited capacity! LOL. stop fooling your so called educated mind. U suck & u don't know shit about NUKES! les u want 2 try it for yourself..jeesh... the only Clean & renewable energy that doesn't commit massive global consequences is THE SUN. with enough solar panels & arrays carefully installed on earth, solar power alone is enough to provide limitless power to whole of world. do your research kid! NO NUKES!
marumito 11 months ago
@marumito
Yes, hooray, after about 5 posts you finally say something sensible. Solar. The only problem there is, you also seem to have ignored the landspaces that would have to be covered up, the habitats that would be destroyed, the economic cost - money don't grow on trees. Space solar is the answer, ground-based is simply illogical.
jimmyboyG485 11 months ago
@jimmyboyG485 - well wuts happening at the economic cost this nuke plant in fukushima is doing right now? the wars in Libya, afghanistan, Iraq Cost more than building solar panels! your are an Idiot! jeesh...I said "carefully installed on earth". since when did corporations cared about the environment? your twisted logic is uttermost alarming. haven't we been destroying the earth ever since? so wut habitats destruction are u talkin' about? go rape the brazilian rainforest if your so concerned.
marumito 11 months ago
I live in this town in florida and we have a nuclear plant here on the intercoastal and never had a problem with it and during the winter when the water gets realy cold the plant warms up the surronding area of water, without it a lot of manatees would freeze to death.
WhiteGangster400 1 year ago
Anger One
zensorship 1 year ago
Brazil is nation with very corrupt politicians. They don't even need that much power in that region. This is all happening because they want to pocket the money that the bank gives them. Lula was a criminal and has left another criminal in charge. There are plans for Russia to build reactors in Brazil. How will all this be stopped? We must make people throw out these corrupt politicans and place a green party there.
blglol 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
To: Greenpeace
Is there radioactivity coming out of that plant? How can we stop them from building more? Can there be protests for going against nuclear power? Thanks.
blglol 1 year ago
Comment removed
blglol 1 year ago
Comment removed
blglol 1 year ago
Comment removed
blglol 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I wonder with what kind of BS the haters after me will comment on this video!
ribar3 1 year ago
Comment removed
ribar3 1 year ago
BNP Paribas is a very bad bank!
iwandotbaka 1 year ago 2