Correction, governments are sovereign. Corporations are endowed with legal personality by national laws. Corporations are not inherently evil. The desire for material gain is an element of the human condition. Alternative energy sources are profitable, but plagued by inherent limitations. Solar and wind are dependent on the weather. Toxic waste is produced from photo-cell manufacturing. Wind turbines slaughter migrating birds, and explode. Bio fuels contribute to world hunger.
@Jsledge85 The only power source capable of reliably generating tetrawatts of carbon free energy is nuclear fission. If safely regulated, nuclear energy is the proverbial torch of Prometheus cast down from the heavens. Closed fuel cycles and emerging waist treatment processes allow nearly all material to be recycled and reused. Modern reactor design, fifty years advanced from Chernobyl's obsolete design make the possibility of meltdown astronomically remote, Thorium fueld reactors even more so.
@Jsledge85 You PR campaign wastest valuable ressources to a not safe tech tree. The closed fuel cycle is a myth and it will allways be a myth because everything in contact with beta radiation is turned into an isotope itself.
Learn the fundamentals of the physics before posting such clueless PR nonesense!
@RegioLunar I never said it was "safe" (i.e. devoid of all danger). I merely stated the fact that nuclear power remains the most efficient, reliable, and potentially beneficial power source mankind currently possesses. Fire, likewise, ceases to provide a source of comfort and warmth if allowed to escape the hearth. Nuclear power is certainly safer than continued reliance on fossil fuels. Potemtial disasters are confined to comparatively small areas instead of the entire globe!
The US uses the waste from the enrichment process and sells it as amunition. Skyrocketing cancer levels in Serbia and Iraq though viciously suppressed by the IAEA and US secret service are reminders of our monumental failure.
"Comparatively smal" is another PR euphemism. Belarus is nearly entirely inhabitable also chuncks of the Ukraine not to mention Majak or areas in the US: FOR ETERNETY!
@RegioLunar Depleted uranium munitions is completely an entirely different side issue from our discussion about the role that nuclear power should play in meeting the growing global demand for crabon-free energy. If the medical data opponents of depleted uranium use is truthful then its use should be curtailed by international agreement. Secret Service? Don't you mean the Pentagon? The Secret Service protects political VIPs and fights counterfeiting.
@Jsledge85 Obviously we both know the hiroshima dataset on how ionizing radiation affects health is false and it ONLY duie to heavy censoring that nuclear IS still a viable "alternative". IF disassembling nuclear plnat´d be priced in nuclear energy´d be horrendously expensive and real alternatives´d get their fair share.
@RegioLunar [Comment Two] "Waste of valuable resources?" Ok, so the diversion of wealth and resources into alternative energy sources that: (1) remain technologically immature; (2) continue to possess inherent limitations (dependent on weather - inconsistent power supply); (3) Produce economic externalities (the use of ariable land for agriculture and habitation must be forgone to use land for wind generation or solar arrays) is better, when they will ultimately fail to alleviate growing demand?
@RegioLunar I am no more a "PR guy" for the nuclear industry than you are a "PR guy" for alternative energy. I am an educated private citizen who vocally supports an enlarging role of nuclear energy to meet the growing demand for cheap energy that Western nations will require to maintain a competitive edge against developing nations (which are actually in the process of constructing new power stations as we speech - China & India).
@RegioLunar I like technology that works, I want technology that can take man to the stars, I want technology that will help Western economies transition into markets that place a high emphasise in the creation of technology.
@RegioLunar I don't reject any of those ideas, my central argument is that Western nations will inevitably be forced to move away from petroleum based energy production as a consequence of scarcity or ecological concerns, nuclear energy should largely fill that gap with renewables comprising a strong secondary power source, but under no circumstances representing the primary energy source.
@Jsledge85 [Second Comment] For example, 60% or 70% nuclear energy and 40% or 30% renewables (solar, geothermal, hydroelectric, ethanols, ect...) {NOTE: This is in the complete absence of carbon fuels - with 'cleaner' carbon fuel technology the proportion shares of both nuclear and renewables would be smaller]
@RegioLunar So what if he does own stock options. Contrary to popular belief you can have your proverbial cake and eat it too. You can personally profit from marketing of goods and services that advance technology and contribute to the satisfaction of human needs (energy). An action does not need to purely altruistic to be considered moral or ethical. For the record, it was American scientist who initially built reactors that operated on thorium in the mid-twentieth century.
@RegioLunar [Comment Two] "The closed fuel cycle is myth?" The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) seems to disagree. Published reports on closed fuel cycles have been periodically generated since the 1970s. Fuel reprocessing (extraction of reusable U-235 from spent fuel) and MOX fuels has likewise occurred in many countries since the 1980s. Fast nuetron reactors (breeder reactors) will make the process even more efficient,
@RegioLunar Why would the IAEA not be unreliable? Their chartared purpose is to regulate the global trade of nuclear technology, audit fissile materials to detect the clandestine diversion materials into clandestine weapons programs, and collect and assess the latest technological developments in nuclear power generation for peaceful purposes. The IAEA's active promotion of nuclear industry is negligable if not entirely nonexistant.
@Jsledge85 [last comment] Yeah the IEAE is soo reliable they let Israel´s arsenal unchecked while supporting warmongering efforts on Iran or North Korea. In light of the Iraq profit war it´s the only reasonable option for any non US vassal to get nukes as quick as possible.
In my opinion the also play a key role in relativiseing the disasterous consequences of the chernobyl catastrophe. They are a complete tool.
@RegioLunar First, I don't necessarily support Israel's acquisition of nuclear weapons. Second, Israel acquired the fissile weapons material "off the books," the IAEA is not perfect, no international organization is, the IAEA is simply a better alternative than the absence of such an organization in the world.
@RegioLunar [Comment Three] It is not I, but rather you who needs remedial physics. A closed fuel cycle is achievable precisely because the transmutation occurs through the mechanism of beta decay. Can every conceivable ounce of spent fuel be recycled? No, but most material can be. Remaining radioisotopes can be isolated and purified in order to used in (1) other industrial uses (ex. nuclear batteries); (2) medical applications; (3) scientific research; (4) permanent storage below surface.
Tghe achivement of transmutation is the ONLY reason why nuclear tech as a whole shouldn´t be scraped instantly. We need to get rid of the vast array of toxic waste products.
These thorium fantasies however are just another bad PR gag from the mining gigants who want to use the waste ore minied together with valuable ores. Another CEO bonus boosting scheme to raise stock perfomance and create phantom yield as it completely neglects negative externalities.
@massivemak Can you muster the intellectual ability to progress beyond simplistic Marxist rhetoric? It is not "greedy" to produce a profit. Governments are responsible for regulation, corporations are impotent in the absence of a favorable regulatory scheme. Western nations have an increasing demand for carbon free energy, nuclear energy is the only power source capable of meeting those needs. Nuclear reactors can built safely and efficiently, and employ millions in the process.
@RegioLunar You neglect the fact that although hundreds of nuclear power plants exists, there have been only three incidences that resulted in partial or complete meltdowns. Three Mile Island was caused by human intervention, Fukushima was the result of a tsunami, Chernobyl was the result of obsolete reactor design!
@RegioLunar Not true! First, if that were so, Chernobyl's exclusion zone would be a barren wasteland instead of a thriving ecological habitat inhabited by a diverse assortment of native flora and fauna. Second, Chernobyl did not possess a containment dome. Third, modern containment domes virtually guarantee fissile materials would be unable to escape to the exterior world in significant quantities if a meltdown actually did occur.
@RegioLunar [Comment Two] All forms of energy possess risk associated with their use! Nuclear energy, unlike other energy sources, remains the only power source capable of sending man to the stars! You must seperate the military applications of this power source from its civil applications. Futhermore, your prejudice against nuclear energy is irrelevant, it doesn't change the fact that it is the greatest source of abundant carbon free energy man has so far developed! It is our greatest hope.
@Jsledge85 Life is risky this this tautology however doesn´t underpin any of your ideas.
The fact that US secret service censors heavily the disasterous consequences of nuclear waste ammunition doesn´t change the fact that ionizing radiation and associated heavy metals are deadly and must be avoided at all cost.
@RegioLunar Once again, the Secret Service doesn't censor anything unrelated to protection of executive branch officials and counterfeiting of US currency. Why? Because the Secret Service is limited, like all federal agencys, to the defined parameters of its organizational mandate. If you are going to accuss my country of corruption or misbehavior have the f***ing decency to ascribe the alleged conduct to appropriate federal agency so you don't look like an idiot (to put it politely).
@massivemak [See Comment Below] The nuclear fuel process need not produce large amounts of nuclear waste. Development of breeder reactors which can use plutonium fuel and reprocessing plants which can create MOX fuel can help create a fuel cycle that nearly closed. The remaining actinides can be contained in vitrified glass and buried need in the earth so deep no radioaction can possibly reach the surface, especially in large salt domes.
@massivemak [See Two Comments Below] People who use your logic are representive of Western Civilization's cultural decadence and psychological, philosophical, and political decline from a state of unrivaled global preeminence. Alternative energy is nothing more than a proverbial bandaid, it certainly is not a solution to the West's energy needs.
Through all of this video - evidence we were able to disclose all the lies and the dangers of the nuclear industry. Our own experiences in Germany have confirmed once again, it was inevitable that the nuclear phase-out!
Bruno Chareyron (CRIIRAD) Nuclear Scientist 1:37 is also very professional. He is a leading nuclear critics in France. Through its extensive documentations on the operation of nuclear facilities and illegal disposal of nuclear waste in France via Russia I've learned a lot. I've also seen his documentary of the uranium mines in Niger.
Comment removed
Jsledge85 6 days ago
Correction, governments are sovereign. Corporations are endowed with legal personality by national laws. Corporations are not inherently evil. The desire for material gain is an element of the human condition. Alternative energy sources are profitable, but plagued by inherent limitations. Solar and wind are dependent on the weather. Toxic waste is produced from photo-cell manufacturing. Wind turbines slaughter migrating birds, and explode. Bio fuels contribute to world hunger.
Jsledge85 1 week ago
@Jsledge85 The only power source capable of reliably generating tetrawatts of carbon free energy is nuclear fission. If safely regulated, nuclear energy is the proverbial torch of Prometheus cast down from the heavens. Closed fuel cycles and emerging waist treatment processes allow nearly all material to be recycled and reused. Modern reactor design, fifty years advanced from Chernobyl's obsolete design make the possibility of meltdown astronomically remote, Thorium fueld reactors even more so.
Jsledge85 1 week ago
@Jsledge85 You PR campaign wastest valuable ressources to a not safe tech tree. The closed fuel cycle is a myth and it will allways be a myth because everything in contact with beta radiation is turned into an isotope itself.
Learn the fundamentals of the physics before posting such clueless PR nonesense!
RegioLunar 1 week ago
@RegioLunar I never said it was "safe" (i.e. devoid of all danger). I merely stated the fact that nuclear power remains the most efficient, reliable, and potentially beneficial power source mankind currently possesses. Fire, likewise, ceases to provide a source of comfort and warmth if allowed to escape the hearth. Nuclear power is certainly safer than continued reliance on fossil fuels. Potemtial disasters are confined to comparatively small areas instead of the entire globe!
Jsledge85 1 week ago
@Jsledge85 "potentially beneficial" potentially detrimental.
The US uses the waste from the enrichment process and sells it as amunition. Skyrocketing cancer levels in Serbia and Iraq though viciously suppressed by the IAEA and US secret service are reminders of our monumental failure.
"Comparatively smal" is another PR euphemism. Belarus is nearly entirely inhabitable also chuncks of the Ukraine not to mention Majak or areas in the US: FOR ETERNETY!
RegioLunar 1 week ago
@RegioLunar Depleted uranium munitions is completely an entirely different side issue from our discussion about the role that nuclear power should play in meeting the growing global demand for crabon-free energy. If the medical data opponents of depleted uranium use is truthful then its use should be curtailed by international agreement. Secret Service? Don't you mean the Pentagon? The Secret Service protects political VIPs and fights counterfeiting.
Jsledge85 1 week ago
@Jsledge85 Obviously we both know the hiroshima dataset on how ionizing radiation affects health is false and it ONLY duie to heavy censoring that nuclear IS still a viable "alternative". IF disassembling nuclear plnat´d be priced in nuclear energy´d be horrendously expensive and real alternatives´d get their fair share.
RegioLunar 1 week ago
@RegioLunar [Comment Two] "Waste of valuable resources?" Ok, so the diversion of wealth and resources into alternative energy sources that: (1) remain technologically immature; (2) continue to possess inherent limitations (dependent on weather - inconsistent power supply); (3) Produce economic externalities (the use of ariable land for agriculture and habitation must be forgone to use land for wind generation or solar arrays) is better, when they will ultimately fail to alleviate growing demand?
Jsledge85 1 week ago
@Jsledge85
1. yeah thanx to PR guys like you
2. managing this creates a ton of real high tech jobs in metereological service and computer scieneces
3. the most hillarious point of all, right creating a deadly wasteland for eternity is not such a bad externality at all.
RegioLunar 1 week ago
@RegioLunar I am no more a "PR guy" for the nuclear industry than you are a "PR guy" for alternative energy. I am an educated private citizen who vocally supports an enlarging role of nuclear energy to meet the growing demand for cheap energy that Western nations will require to maintain a competitive edge against developing nations (which are actually in the process of constructing new power stations as we speech - China & India).
Jsledge85 1 week ago
@Jsledge85 Some british rich guy came up with thie "thorium-alternative" and i bet he owns big stock options in Rio Tinto or BHP Billiton.
I on the other hand support what´s reasonable and sustainable. Your support is a bit odd at least.
RegioLunar 1 week ago
@RegioLunar I like technology that works, I want technology that can take man to the stars, I want technology that will help Western economies transition into markets that place a high emphasise in the creation of technology.
Jsledge85 6 days ago
Comment removed
RegioLunar 6 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Jsledge85 I do not understand why you reject the whide array of other electricity sources.
Fuel cells powerd by hydrogen created from cellulose digested by termite gut bacteria.
Wind, solar, methane produced by algea. Integrated into a decentralized shock resistant power grid.
So many exciting ideas yet you stick to the one deadly invention. I realy do not understand why as you must have some technical understanding.
RegioLunar 6 days ago
@RegioLunar I don't reject any of those ideas, my central argument is that Western nations will inevitably be forced to move away from petroleum based energy production as a consequence of scarcity or ecological concerns, nuclear energy should largely fill that gap with renewables comprising a strong secondary power source, but under no circumstances representing the primary energy source.
Jsledge85 5 days ago
@Jsledge85 [Second Comment] For example, 60% or 70% nuclear energy and 40% or 30% renewables (solar, geothermal, hydroelectric, ethanols, ect...) {NOTE: This is in the complete absence of carbon fuels - with 'cleaner' carbon fuel technology the proportion shares of both nuclear and renewables would be smaller]
Jsledge85 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RegioLunar So what if he does own stock options. Contrary to popular belief you can have your proverbial cake and eat it too. You can personally profit from marketing of goods and services that advance technology and contribute to the satisfaction of human needs (energy). An action does not need to purely altruistic to be considered moral or ethical. For the record, it was American scientist who initially built reactors that operated on thorium in the mid-twentieth century.
Jsledge85 6 days ago
@RegioLunar [Comment Two] "The closed fuel cycle is myth?" The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) seems to disagree. Published reports on closed fuel cycles have been periodically generated since the 1970s. Fuel reprocessing (extraction of reusable U-235 from spent fuel) and MOX fuels has likewise occurred in many countries since the 1980s. Fast nuetron reactors (breeder reactors) will make the process even more efficient,
Jsledge85 1 week ago
@Jsledge85 As if the IAEA is a reliable source for info.
It´s like asking Moodys if the securities market is a safe place to invest in.
Also all fast breeding reactors have been shut down due to failed expectations.
RegioLunar 1 week ago
@RegioLunar Why would the IAEA not be unreliable? Their chartared purpose is to regulate the global trade of nuclear technology, audit fissile materials to detect the clandestine diversion materials into clandestine weapons programs, and collect and assess the latest technological developments in nuclear power generation for peaceful purposes. The IAEA's active promotion of nuclear industry is negligable if not entirely nonexistant.
Jsledge85 1 week ago
Comment removed
RegioLunar 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Jsledge85 [last comment] Yeah the IEAE is soo reliable they let Israel´s arsenal unchecked while supporting warmongering efforts on Iran or North Korea. In light of the Iraq profit war it´s the only reasonable option for any non US vassal to get nukes as quick as possible.
In my opinion the also play a key role in relativiseing the disasterous consequences of the chernobyl catastrophe. They are a complete tool.
RegioLunar 1 week ago
@RegioLunar First, I don't necessarily support Israel's acquisition of nuclear weapons. Second, Israel acquired the fissile weapons material "off the books," the IAEA is not perfect, no international organization is, the IAEA is simply a better alternative than the absence of such an organization in the world.
Jsledge85 5 days ago
@RegioLunar [Comment Three] It is not I, but rather you who needs remedial physics. A closed fuel cycle is achievable precisely because the transmutation occurs through the mechanism of beta decay. Can every conceivable ounce of spent fuel be recycled? No, but most material can be. Remaining radioisotopes can be isolated and purified in order to used in (1) other industrial uses (ex. nuclear batteries); (2) medical applications; (3) scientific research; (4) permanent storage below surface.
Jsledge85 1 week ago
@Jsledge85 [last comment]
Tghe achivement of transmutation is the ONLY reason why nuclear tech as a whole shouldn´t be scraped instantly. We need to get rid of the vast array of toxic waste products.
These thorium fantasies however are just another bad PR gag from the mining gigants who want to use the waste ore minied together with valuable ores. Another CEO bonus boosting scheme to raise stock perfomance and create phantom yield as it completely neglects negative externalities.
RegioLunar 1 week ago
Ultimately the world is run by corporate greed and there financially sponsored political cronies.
just sit back and let them destroy whats left when there is no drinking water and it rains radioactive sit back and wait for a slow painful death.
alternative energies do not make a million dollars a hour for its investors
nor do bio fuels ect but they help the world to get by.
shouldn't getting by be enough.
massivemak 3 weeks ago
@massivemak Can you muster the intellectual ability to progress beyond simplistic Marxist rhetoric? It is not "greedy" to produce a profit. Governments are responsible for regulation, corporations are impotent in the absence of a favorable regulatory scheme. Western nations have an increasing demand for carbon free energy, nuclear energy is the only power source capable of meeting those needs. Nuclear reactors can built safely and efficiently, and employ millions in the process.
Jsledge85 3 weeks ago
@Jsledge85 "nuclear energy is the only power source capable of meeting those needs."
LOL! No? It´s the most lethal and devastating technology ever explored?
RegioLunar 1 week ago
@RegioLunar You neglect the fact that although hundreds of nuclear power plants exists, there have been only three incidences that resulted in partial or complete meltdowns. Three Mile Island was caused by human intervention, Fukushima was the result of a tsunami, Chernobyl was the result of obsolete reactor design!
Jsledge85 1 week ago
@Jsledge85 An you neglect the fact that IF a nuclear plant melts down it´s hostile to human life forever.
RegioLunar 1 week ago
@RegioLunar Not true! First, if that were so, Chernobyl's exclusion zone would be a barren wasteland instead of a thriving ecological habitat inhabited by a diverse assortment of native flora and fauna. Second, Chernobyl did not possess a containment dome. Third, modern containment domes virtually guarantee fissile materials would be unable to escape to the exterior world in significant quantities if a meltdown actually did occur.
Jsledge85 1 week ago
@RegioLunar [Comment Two] All forms of energy possess risk associated with their use! Nuclear energy, unlike other energy sources, remains the only power source capable of sending man to the stars! You must seperate the military applications of this power source from its civil applications. Futhermore, your prejudice against nuclear energy is irrelevant, it doesn't change the fact that it is the greatest source of abundant carbon free energy man has so far developed! It is our greatest hope.
Jsledge85 1 week ago
Comment removed
RegioLunar 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Jsledge85 Life is risky this this tautology however doesn´t underpin any of your ideas.
The fact that US secret service censors heavily the disasterous consequences of nuclear waste ammunition doesn´t change the fact that ionizing radiation and associated heavy metals are deadly and must be avoided at all cost.
RegioLunar 1 week ago
Comment removed
Jsledge85 1 week ago
Comment removed
Jsledge85 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RegioLunar Once again, the Secret Service doesn't censor anything unrelated to protection of executive branch officials and counterfeiting of US currency. Why? Because the Secret Service is limited, like all federal agencys, to the defined parameters of its organizational mandate. If you are going to accuss my country of corruption or misbehavior have the f***ing decency to ascribe the alleged conduct to appropriate federal agency so you don't look like an idiot (to put it politely).
Jsledge85 1 week ago
@massivemak [See Comment Below] The nuclear fuel process need not produce large amounts of nuclear waste. Development of breeder reactors which can use plutonium fuel and reprocessing plants which can create MOX fuel can help create a fuel cycle that nearly closed. The remaining actinides can be contained in vitrified glass and buried need in the earth so deep no radioaction can possibly reach the surface, especially in large salt domes.
Jsledge85 3 weeks ago
@massivemak [See Two Comments Below] People who use your logic are representive of Western Civilization's cultural decadence and psychological, philosophical, and political decline from a state of unrivaled global preeminence. Alternative energy is nothing more than a proverbial bandaid, it certainly is not a solution to the West's energy needs.
Jsledge85 3 weeks ago
where can i find the backgound music played in this documentary.Can anybody tell me plz...thanks
lazydaisy000 1 month ago
Thorium.
redlinr1 2 months ago
@redlinr1 Yes, Thorium is a waste ore mined at the Olympic Dam mine f.e.x.
RegioLunar 1 week ago
Through all of this video - evidence we were able to disclose all the lies and the dangers of the nuclear industry. Our own experiences in Germany have confirmed once again, it was inevitable that the nuclear phase-out!
atomunfall 3 months ago
Bruno Chareyron (CRIIRAD) Nuclear Scientist 1:37 is also very professional. He is a leading nuclear critics in France. Through its extensive documentations on the operation of nuclear facilities and illegal disposal of nuclear waste in France via Russia I've learned a lot. I've also seen his documentary of the uranium mines in Niger.
atomunfall 3 months ago
The people of the "Australian Conservation Foundation" are very professional. Last year they had supported us with a call for nuclear phase-out.
After Fukushima we had in Germany a majority of 90 percent and the government has also changed her mind and decided to get out. Thank you for that!
atomunfall 3 months ago
23:10 - 23:43
FlamingBridgeTroll 3 months ago in playlist FlamingBridgeTroll's favorites