Reply With Quote
All that atom bomb testing apparently has nothing on this reactor.
I stopped trying to keep track of your stupidity a long time ago. There is just so much of it, and it was so obvious. I made my point, and the suck thing is you never learned from it.
In- ing-credible.
All that atom bomb testing apparently has nothing on this reactor.
there might be a basis for comparison. the Fukushima accident is ongoing.
... with a typhoon on the way.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...ve-water-leak/In a 2012 study, Jota Kanda, an oceanographer at Toyko University of Marine Science and Technology, calculated that the plant is leaking 0.3 terabecquerels (trillion becquerels) of cesium-137 per month and a similar amount of cesium-134. While that number sounds mind-boggling, it’s actually thousands of times less than the level of radioactive contamination that the plant was spewing in the immediate aftermath of the disaster, estimated to be from 5,000 to 15,000 terabecquerels, according to Buesseler. For a comparison, the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima released 89 terabecquerels of cesium-137 when it exploded.
http://enenews.com/radio-fukushima-d...mb-tests-audiole: Wayne Brittenden’s Counterpoint
Source: Radio New Zealand
Date: July 28, 2013
Wayne Brittenden, host: [...] This latest revelation, the leaking of radioactive water into the sea to harm marine and ultimately human life, hasn’t just happened — the revelation came a day after Prime Minister and nuclear power devotee Shinzo Abe was re-elected. The bad news would’ve undoubtedly affected his chances. [...]
At ~12:00 in
Arnie Gundersen, former nuclear industry executive and now chief engineer at the Fairewinds organisation: The net effect is the Pacific near Japan, and likely the whole Pacific, over the next 5 years will have cesium levels 5 to 10 times higher than what they were at the peak of bomb testing. So this is the biggest release of radiation to a body of water in the history of the world, much worse than Chernobyl. So the net effect is we’ve contaminated the biggest body of water on the planet [...]
http://readersupportednews.org/news-...hima-radiationIn October, a U.S. study - co-authored by oceanographer Ken Buesseler, a senior scientist at the non-profit Woods Hole Oceanographic Ins ution in Woods Hole, Massachusetts - reported Fukushima caused history's biggest-ever release of radiation into the ocean - 10 to 100 times more than the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear catastrophe.
eating bananas is more dangerous, for sure: http://news.discovery.com/earth/ocea...-us-130901.htm
Something tells me that > 100 nuclear tests in the Pacific might be worse than Fukushima.
you're hilarious, Darrin
Yep, that BP spill broke the ocean, too.
Here's anecdotal proof
lol strawman
He just posted a quantification of radioactive debris from the a bombs versus what fukushima did. It was 89 vs 15000.
Willful stupidity.
Read his posts from today. There are two of them that are germane. I'll even give you a hint: it's in the quoted portion.
All you are doing is demonstrating how you are willfully stupid. Bravo.
I doubt there is much we can do about fighting against natural processes. I'll bet this is a cycle that regularly occurs, like the graph i presented earlier. The strong will survive and repopulate the species, except those who's time has come to be extinct.
Life will go on.
There is an upper limit and lower limit to the cycle. As the paper pointed out, those are going to be surpassed as we are going. This is very similar to what BEST was getting at in their analysis. It like this has been shown to be beyond your capacity to understand.
You claim I don't understand, but it is you, who never displays your understanding.
When is the last time you explained any climate chemistry or energy physics in your own words? I don't recall a single time. All you do is link passages from your holy AGW dogma.
I just did. The article that you cited fwiw never said anything about upper and lower bounds. I have tried to discuss heat exchange models between ocean layers as well as surface and air. I mean ffs when I first started posting here I embarrassed you about energy storage and the function of capacitors. You remember my discussion of the PDE's used to describe the heat exchange? Probably not because you don't understand the math.
At the end of the day, I realize that the PhD's we reference here know more about the topic than I do. I understand what they are saying but I do not front like it was my idea and give them credit. That is just ethical.
In this case, the upper and lower bounds of the cycle are what they are. The way that it is trending will exceed those bounds. You can whine about it not being my idea but it still is what it is. How about you discuss that instead of trying this lame bait and switch.
How the world’s oceans could be running out of fish
Entire species of marine life will never be seen in the Anthropocene (the Age of Man), let alone tasted, if we do not curb our insatiable voracity for fish. Last year, global fish consumption hit a record high of 17 kg (37 pounds) per person per year, even though global fish stocks have continued to decline. On average, people eat four times as much fish now than they did in 1950.
Around 85% of global fish stocks are over-exploited, depleted, fully exploited or in recovery from exploitation. Only this week, a report suggested there may be fewer than 100 cod over the age of 13 years in the North Sea between the United Kingdom and Scandinavia. The figure is still under dispute, but it’s a worrying sign that we could be losing fish old enough to create offspring that replenish populations.
Large areas of seabed in the Mediterranean and North Sea now resemble a desert – the seas have been expunged of fish using increasingly efficient methods such as bottom trawling. And now, these heavily subsidised industrial fleets are cleaning up tropical oceans too. One-quarter of the EU catch is now made outside European waters, much of it in previously rich West African seas, where each trawler can scoop up hundreds of thousands of kilos of fish in a day. All West African fisheries are now over-exploited, coastal fisheries have declined 50% in the past 30 years, according to the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation.
Catches in the tropics are expected to decline a further 40% by 2050, and yet some 400 million people in Africa and Southeast Asia rely on fish caught (mainly through artisanal fishing) to provide their protein and minerals. With climate change expected to impact agricultural production, people are going to rely more than ever on fish for their nutritional needs.
The policy of subsidising vast fishing fleets to catch ever-diminishing stocks is unsustainable. In Spain, for example, one in three fish landed is paid for by subsidy. Governments, concerned with keeping jobs alive in the fishing industry in the short-term, are essentially paying people to extinguish their own long-term job prospects – not to mention the effect on the next generation of fishermen. Artisanal fishing catches half the world’s fish, yet it provides 90% of the sector’s jobs.
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/2012...ng-out-of-fish
Last edited by boutons_deux; 10-24-2013 at 06:22 AM.
You lied.
And this required no anger or insults on my part.
Good day
And the oceans survived all those nuclear tests. It will survive Fukushima too.
You serious? If so, you are monumentally dumb.
There was nothing embarrassing about not realizing capacitors have developed to such capacity. I'm not a car stereo freak like you. Then you prove you still don't know about electronic when it came to putting capacitors in series, or the real reason high power is in three phase.
You have got to be the least deserving egotistic ass in this forum.
As for heat exchange, you were telling me something was impossible that I quoted from your AGW Gods, and you thought I was making it up.
You are a loser to such a degree, you don't even realize it. I'd put you on ignore again, but I'm getting too many laughs from your stupidity!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
