Greenpeace shuts nuclear reactor construction

[cchapli]

I am a nuclear engineering student and I am pretty sure that greanpeace are just a whole bunch of people that really dont understand anything about science they just like the attention, do me a favor greenpeace and go crawl back into the hole you came from.

[binbashLinuxAhole]

Green peace is such a pathetic organization.

[Willanhanyard]

Lol these are the kind of people who completely destroy a working successful civilization. They go in there trying to "Improve safety and be greener" but all they end up doing is wrecking everything. They are complete communists who can't do anything good in life, so they go after people who are successful and wreck them. Horrible people.

[SuperBunkerbuster]

How many liters per hour of oil fluff this old greanpeace's mercedes truck ?

[EugeneLancelot]

so how does radiation affect people? How does a nuclear plant work? What safety mechanisms do they have in place to prevent accidents? What maintenance is done to ensure everything works properly? What material do we use as fuel and what happens in the nuclear reaction? How do we get energy from it? What does the "waste" consist of? How do we control the reactors power when it is critical? What does it mean when the reactor is critical? I would like these answered by a greenpeace person please

[Allante715]

@EugeneLancelot

Good Luck.

[DancingBProductions]

one nuclear reactor can safely and in a clean manor power the biggest ship on earth non stop for 20 years... and these douchebags are trying to stop it, thereby encouraging using recourses like oil which make bad people like bush rich. and which pollute....

[makie2006]

people read up yourselves and make sure you understand excactly the advantages and shortcomings of nuclear power. the benefits far outway the costs. don't be swayed by other peoples influence, find out for yourselves. I fear there is a great deal of 'jumping on the bandwagon' around certain issues, as long as the industry remains regulated properly as im sure it will there is no need to feel negative about nuclear FISSION power, it will be outdated in the near future by something safer.

[makie2006]

The other issue people see is the waste issue. which no denying it, is a problem. however the newer reactors produce less dangerous waste and this can be safely stored until there is lower decay. This is a mid range solution, the eventual solution is the experimental thorium reactors, read up if you dont know about the technology, and eventually fusion power, both with little to no waste products. We are only talking circa max 100 years of 'dirty' generation, a small price to pay

[makie2006]

............. which is the type of accident that can potentially cause a disaster like chernobyl.

Power based on solely wind and solar etc is unfeasable, not enough by far to cover what is needed in the UK. There is talk to reduce the consumption of energy etc. which has effects on the quality of living, thats a diff argument.

The only way to ensure everybody has power is using coal gas or nuclear fuels, given the current atmosphere of global warming etc nuclear has to be the choice.

[makie2006]

The problem with the Perception of nuclear power is poor education on the subject.

When taking into account decomissioning running costs etc everything, they are more expensive than coal or ccgt generation and hydro, however the costs of wind solar, tidal are larger. through manufacture maintainance grid connection etc.

This indistry, my industry, around the world is heavily regulated. The UK's plants have a variety of measures to protect the plant in the event of a loss of coolant accident

[vargulf19]

Nuclear power plants are dangerous. Myth. They are less dangerous than all other forms

Nuclear power plants are unnecessary. Myth. 8 ceramic pellets can power a house for ONE YEAR.

Nuclear power plants are uneconomic. Myth. In fact it is one of the most economic fuel sources.

[DELTAFORCE851]

Idiots, you are so scared of the astronomicaly small chance of a meltdown. Here is a reality check you live a carbon meltdown everyday that kills far more people than any radiation produced by that plant. The smog produced by cars and the sut produced by coal plants is far worse than nuclear energy could dream of ever becoming. you are cutting off your nose to spite your face. Nuclear energy is clean, and nuclear energy is the future.

[bnsfMAN93]

A great thing to do to these greenpeace fucks would be to just act like they dont exist. If they stand in front of your gate, RUN THEM THE FUCK OVER. They are just wasting time, not creating "peace" like they say the are. If they were truly "green", they would fight the coal and oil industries instead.

[ethanswish123]

Hahaha, wow. I have two words for ya; Fuck Greenpeace. Wow, look at that shit! Nuclear reactors are completely safe now. The reactors no days can prevent itself from another meltdown. The shit that people look nuclear bad is because of Chernobyl and Three Mile Island. Woopty fucking doo! Chernobyl was a RBMK reactor type and was built very cheaply, and three mile island was also. I mean, look, the technology we have no is much better than we did in the past you stupid fucks!! get a life

[WildernessGuyBC]

Have a look on Wiki how many Nuclear accidents have occurred.... LOTS!!! and we have only been doing this for 50 years... I agree that the plants are 99.5% safe, but the waste is a legacy that will affect life for millenniums. It's just too great a risk especially when you consider that we will have all the wind and solar power we need in the next 100 years. Yes, Nuclear kills less people then fossil right now, but toxic nuclear waste for 100000 years is an unprecedented incalculable risk.

[cchapli]

@WildernessGuyBC your a dumb f**k please don't ever speak on the internet ever again.

[WildernessGuyBC]

Radioactive waste is the problem and will remain a problem for HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of years because that's how long it remains radioactive. There are thousands of sites around the world containing radioactive materials and its being transported through large population centers. It's only a matter of time before a Chernobyl scale accident occurs (or worse!!!). Think of it like pot odds in poker. 1000 of sites x 100000 years or more. Read about the Hanford site WA state or type it into YT.

[TheFluffyDuck]

They should be ashamed. They care more about there elitist green ideology than the environment.

They dont even read the science and openly lie about nuclear. It makes me soo sad.

[Beastmasterification]

They feed off of fear and emotions not science and logic. I think honestly that greenpeace expects the worlds energy source to go from rainbows and unicorns. They really need to get a job and help humanity.

[ethanswish123]

You know, I feel the same way. They are extremely bias when it comes to nuclear, and they don't even throw out the right kinds of facts. There is no bad side of reactors, only the waste problem, but guess what, France developed a way to RECYCLE the waste and use it over and over. People need to lear the facts, and quit trying to convince pussy forms of energy, such as wind and solar. These people should be ashamed and should try to shut down COAL PLANTS. I THOUGH THEY WERE GREEN, RIGHT?

[TheFluffyDuck]

Then they complain. "look how long it takes to build a nuke reactor".

I wonder the fuck why!

[spernoadversa]

Alright! Way to stop progress hippies!!!

[bohs1984]

How ironic. These idiots go around trying get everybody to buy into their bullshit "Jetson's" technology that does not exist or is non-sustainable yet stop a form of energy that is actually very eco friendly and will cut carbon emissions. These people are idiots and they are dangerous.

[Chaoschemiker]

You must be cool...

Being against EPR is really great.

You really must like the RBMK in Kursk and Smolensk a lot. Nobody is protesting against them xD

Greenpeace. Being against something, not knowing why.

Patrick Moore was the last of them who used his head not only for fixing at rail tracks.

[DrBuzz0]

Greenpeace has to learn that if they disagree with the government's policies they need to use political campaigns and direct appeals to get their message across.  France is a Democracy and the democratic process is how to do it.

This is a cheap and CRIMINAL stunt that puts the lives of workers in danger, costs the community money and serves no purpose. These jackasses should be arrested and imprisoned for this crap.

[jasbcor]

They should have stuck to saving the whales.

[technician413]

Nuclear power is becoming the only possible way to keep up with growing world wide demand. Wind and solar alone are not enough and are too expensive to keep up. These greenpeace fools are just plain idiots!!! Run them over and continue with the work, F**K them!!!!

[TheFluffyDuck]

Use their bodies as bio mass. Theres so many of theses fucks sprouting up all over the world it certainly is a renewable source of energy......If only misplaced.

[NorskeDivision]

Good job. I wonder how many tons of CO2 slowing down that plant construction added to our atmosphere. Greenpeace is based in pseudoscience, sensationalism and fear mongering, they've lost their way.

Anti-nuke people, forget greenpeace and embrace science based realistic solutions to environmental problems. This means nuclear, solar, wind NOW. Being wrong doesn't make you stupid, but refusing to change when you are shown to be wrong does. Come back from March 29, 1979 and join us here in 2008.

[underterraingrunter]

@NorskeDivision And now join us here post Fukushima. There has been a suggestion to OCCUPY Nuke Plant Building Sites. Preventing the construction of a Nuke Plant will prevent millions of years of lethal pollution. The waste doesn't go away.

[darthkill1]

a plane at it

you need to take the control rods out of it and seeing that the plant is under attack i think they would deploy all of them

meaning you have under 1 hour to pull out the control rods

fool the cpu into keeping it open

and accessing the plant to start up the reaction

i think its slim to none

and just to get a small amount of uranium or spread radiation i think protocalls would be taken

stupid green peace n00bs.....

and im 14 for crying out loud!

[darthkill1]

stupid green peace i agree with what genius 83 said

build nuclear coz its better than oil gas and coal

then we can think about other alternatives

wind power is too weak to put up enough power for a country like britan

also tidal power

and solar is very costly and inefficent

also they hold potential nuclear weapons their concrete structure is going to be strong enough to last several hits by 747's

also you can only make a reactor out of control through CHEMICAL reactions

not flying.......

[hartsi8666]

you greenpeaceterrorists should be shot, your actions are the worst crime against humanity, after your birth of course.

[jg9video]

I wish all of the Greenpeace people were standing on top of the reactor when Chernobyl blew.

[patmix]

STUPIDS SUB-HUMANS GET-OFF AND LET NUCLEAR ALIVE COZ ITS A WAY

greenpeace: ur just a bunch of eco-terrorism peice of craps

officers around the world= get all this anti-capitalist arrogant in hole 4 RIGHT F.. NOW

THEY TAKE SO MANNY JOBS FROM HONEST HARD-WORKIN WORKER ON THIS PLANET SINCE TOO LONG TIME

ITS TIME TO STOP YOU NOW 4 GOOD

[Genius83]

The simple facts are...if we don't build more nuclear power stations (which the French are doing - well done to them for producing 80%+ of their energy from nuclear power), we're gonna have to build more coal powered stations. Sticking a load of wind turbines up will no suffice! I wish Britian adopted the same attictude as the French - i.e. to ignore Greenpeace on a subject area they really don't know as much about as they make out to!

[patie1234]

i am 12

but i wanna join greenpeace

[AntonBreusov]

Greenpeace - homeless hippie lunatics. :-]

[MokomaSusi]

Hear, hear. Reason why there has been mistakes durin construction of EPR is becos none has build any power plants in 15 years.

[redpunk]

that and the fact that whenever they manage to get a good plan for construction in motion, greenpeace shops around for a court that will make them throw the plan out and start over

[redpunk]

no, greenpeace makes money off of dumbass neo-hippies

being a hippy was fun in the 60s when everyone was young, but eventually people grew the fuck up and either found a way to make money off of it or decided to do their own thing. now we have a bunch of dumbass posers. modern environmentalists are worse than phineas freak

[lonympics]

Alot of pro nuclear people just think it is macho to support nuclear. They believe whatever BS pro nuclear propaganda tells them. Apparenlty a nuclear building is indestructable. Wow why don't they build the pentagon out of that. Wow. I suppose the pentagon was made of plywood. .

[lonympics]

Like the people in Chernobyl who lost their homes.

[redpunk]

nobody even uses reactors like that any more

chernobyl didn't have any containment at all. ask a nuclear engineer. not a "nuclear expert"

[lonympics]

Using spurious comments to defend your argument. The fact chernobyl did not have a contianment building shows happens if their is an accident ot attack, And the containemtn has been broken. So what if they have changed they are still nuclear energy stations. What do you htink they have done to these?

[redpunk]

i wish we would just decide on a nuclear program in the U.S. people are so divided that politicians are terrified of the issue, and as a result, these jackoffs just shop around for a court that will rule in their favor. these would be the same pseudo scientists who think that hitting the corner of a metal crate puts the least stress on it. they've yet to produce an actual nuclear scientist who agrees with them

[lonympics]

Nuclear lobby are the mostt arofant BS people. Loads of nuclear scientist people says nuclear energy is unsafe. But you just dissmiss them all as wrong.

[redpunk]

i've seen one guy identified as greenpeace's "nuclear expert" whine about nuclear reactors, but i've never seen anyone that could provide any credentials to prove their expertise in any nuclear science field call it unsafe

[lonympics]

Greenpeace have inside documentation from the nuclear lobby. While the house of commons committe said a nuclear accident in Cumbria would kill millions But I suppose MPs and people if the department of defence are all morons.

[redpunk]

MPs are military police not scientists. and the U.S. doesn't have a house of commons

they were talking about potential damage from a nuclear disaster, which could potentially do an absurd amount of damage, but they've pretty much figured out how to build the reactors so that the machines themselves will prevent that from happening even if a human operator tries to push it. they basically design them to stop working if there's a problem

[lonympics]

MPs as in UK Member of parliament. As usual you dissmiss critics of nuclear energy as absurd insane. While every pro nuclear campaigner is in your view the new Einstein. You cannot design a nuclear reactor in the way you say. If you feel that why do they build a contianment sheild in 1st place.

[redpunk]

they've been designed reactors like that for a long time now. the only problem is that in the U.S. we have to use the old ones which are more dangerous because greenpeace won't even let people disassemble them and transport the components and the fuel

and of course you use shielding and containment. it'll still work without it, but there's no way for the fucker to keep itself in check if you don't. it's not like it's hard to shield a reactor. just need a forklift and some concrete blocks

[lonympics]

Rubbish. You do not have any evidence for you comment,. Greenpeace provide evidence from let me say this again Insuide the nuclear industry. And use your common sense Do you seriously think a concrete block can stop 300 tonne 700 mph aeroplane. Have you slept through 9 11 or did the lizard people do that.

[redpunk]

i thought you were talking about radiation shielding

they use reinforced concrete to protect the reactor from a potential impact. if a plane smashed into the housing for the reactor, the plane would be reduced to dust. they make sure the material is structurally sound by smashing a plane into it a 700 mph

[lonympics]

Do you seriously believe that. The nuclear industry have leaked reports admitting that is rubbish. How can anyone belive a 300 tonne aeroplane would not destroy concrete. Did you sleep through 9 11. You have this tremendous confidence in an industry which talks BS. Have you heard of 9 11.

[lonympics]

They do not have protection against a 300 tonne aeroplane flying at 700 mph. Where are you getting this idea from. Who said this you? It is rubbish. Reinforced concrete the pentagon was made of reinforced concerete. So what. You then have to consider truck bombs and other weaponry of the future in a decade. I assure you no serious nucelar scientist who knows there stuff would claim a block of concrete is indestructable.

[redpunk]

nobody came out and just said it to me

i watch them slam a plane into one of the walls they use and the end result was a disintegrated plane and an intact wall

the pentagon actually withstood the impact pretty well. it'd be nice if it was stronger, but that would basically require the whole thing be rebuilt

and unless they've started using supersonic jets again, you won't find much going 700 mph. not only that, you won't find many people who will try to do something like that anymore

[lonympics]

That test at the Sandia nat labs. Was of a Fighter jet, not a 300 tone aeroplane, on a track not in the air, crashing into an unanchored piece of concrete. The test a was fake. They even allow the concrete block to move back to take some of the stress. It is a fake. You fall for it hook line a sinker. If that is the only evidence you have you are a naive.

[redpunk]

the only reason they used a track was so it wouldn't miss and go over. when a plane goes 700 mph, it tends to get lift

oh and the f-4 delivers more force. about 67000N more. but then again newton must be wrong about impulse because you're the undisputed science authority

engineers know what they are doing, and they take what they do very seriously. if you cut corners, even if you're a high ranking staff member, they will get rid of you , and the NRC will fuck you up the ass

[lonympics]

There is no way an F4 at 500 on a track, can deliver more force than 300 tonne civilian aircraft at 700 in air. Use you common sense. Pentagon 9/11 reality versus closed propaganda. Which one do you believe. They coud have flown the plane into a block using remote control. It was the cold war government allways lied then. They said it was safe to prevent what they would see as hysteria about nuclear energy after chernobyl.

[redpunk]

we were talking about different velocities

and that still isn't the reason the claim about force is wrong. common sense should find a hell of a lot more wrong with that claim than you did

and you're overestimating the capabilities of civilian aircraft. 530 mph is the stop speed for something like a 767

[kamalamekkala]

idiots!!!!!!!!!!

[zk0]

Nuclear power is dangerous and completely awful. Don't be fooled by the comments that think nuclear power is positive. They have no idea what they are talking about.

[AntonBreusov]

O RLY?

[jlg420]

Nuclear power is risky? Define risky. If you are talking about safety, then you are just plain wrong. You should do some research on the amount of safety features that are built into the new generation of plants like the EPR. Wind and solar are great but incredibly unreliable. Hydro is great but it's not feasible for our massive baseload energy needs. Maybe we'll have a better answer in 20 or 30 years. But for now, nuclear is the way to go. Get out of the way greenpeace!

[redpunk]

greenpeace just needs to go away. it's basically run by corporates and politicians. we need someone to push for environmentalism, but we need people with a background in science that show that they know what the fuck they're talking about. these people just produce someone without giving a name or any real crednetials

[BlizBob]

Nuclear power is the most practical and environmentally friendly form on power at humanity's disposal at the moment. This kind of activity is just stupid waste of time.

[racka007]

Sometimes they are useful, sometimes they are not. In this case, they were not. Nobody actually figured out, that without NPP we wouldn`t be watching this video at all because one nuclear reactor gives more energy than 10 water plants. Not to mention poisones termo plants. You can`t enjoy comnodity witout making a sacrafice.

[laurimyllyvirta]

Check out energyblueprint dot info to see what we want instead of risky nuclear power.

On your comments: You must be quite confused.. hydropower plants range from a few kW to 10 GW or something while commercial nukes are usually between 0.1 and 1.5 GW.

Besides that, I don't get your point here - what matters economically is the levelized cost of power.

[laurimyllyvirta]

And if you put e.g. wind power and nukes on a level playing field, no subsidies; full liability for accidents, decommissioning and waste; no dubious government financing and insurance in case of cost overruns, wind power is likely to be more attractive.

[laurimyllyvirta]

True, individual wind power plants are small but they are also simple and fast to build. And same goes for bioenergy, run of river hydro, geothermal, heat pumps etc. And regardless of what energy sources you deploy, efficiency of energy use is the most important part of the equation - not only according to Greenpeace but also e.g. International Energy Agency.

[1WooDoo1]

U know nothing about energy... Don´t type here bullshits, don´t waste time of some stupid activity... go to school and learn!

[galballyc]

I COMPLETELY agree with you

[galballyc]

geothermal??? bioenergy??? wind farms??? you must be kidding... Yes, you are right, Itaipu hydropower plant is 14000MW... and 1400km^2. You only need around 40Km^2 with EPR to get that power... please, if you don't know about the things you talk, you should just shut up and do us all a favour

[jlg420]

The reason there are government subsidies and "dubious financing" (whatever that means) is because thanks to morons like greenpeace we haven't had new plant designs in the last 25 years. This is brand new technology that's starting to be built so subsidies are needed to balance the risk of unproven technology.

[jlg420]

So far it has been a major reward for nations like Japan and Taiwan that have built GE's ABWR. As this technology becomes more mainstream and the price of oil continues to sky rocket, governemnt subsidies will no longer be necessary.

[Allante715]

@laurimyllyvirta

Typical ignorant comment. Ever heard of a thing called Capacity Factor? Its something Nuclear has and Wind doesn`t. Something Nuclear will always have and something Wind will never have. The difference between stable electric power and rolling blackouts.