back for my weekly posts

how is this remotely comparable? as an aircraft has the capability of killing 400 (if just passengers) or maybe a couple of thousand if the wrong middle eastern dude got on board, but a full meltown could be our worldwide two headed baby Zombie apocalypse.

Wouldn't a full melt down create a 20 ish mile exclusion zone? Chernobyl?

The Chernobyl accident isn't entirely comparable to Fukushima, but it did create a large Zone of Alienation, as it's called, to contain the contaminated areas. The main section of this, where the reactor is/was, has a 30km radius from the plant. You can see a nice picture form of this here: http://upload.wikimedia.org/...yl_radiation_map_1996.svg

now they have deformed animals near fukishima

you say it as if it's a bad thing?!?

Three eyed fish... mmmmm tasty

my body has a fit when i take anything with fake sugar. screw recievin just a little radiation

The tablets you want in the event of a nuclear event are potassium ioDIDE, not potassium ioDATE. Very different chemicals. The BAD thing with taking these pills: The thyroid concentrates iodine in the body and radioactive iodine exposure can cause thyroid cancer later on. Also, the other bad radioactive isotope is strontium-90, which has an affinity for the bone marrow. It cannot be blocked or removed. Do not just randomly take the KI pills.. they have very serious side effects if you're not within about 100 miles of Fukushima - the side effects simply are not worth it.

You'll be able to measure the radiation increase if you're in Hawaii w.r.t. background level, if you try hard enough with sensitive instruments. But Fukushima will mean absolutely nothing in terms of health risks to Hawaii. The pills should only be taken if you're downwind of an actual nuclear event.

the whole point is that nuclear is somehow seen as a cheap way to generate electricity . its not cheap if 1 in 150 has a big enough breakdown to need this sort of effort to avoid its side effects .

The problem is extending the life of old plants with ancient designs, which is what happened with Fukushima and the US :O

http://valleyadvocate.com/article.cfm?aid=13280

Due to decommission in 2012, Entergy the owner/operator of Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant is attempting to get permits to operate the plant for another 20 years. There have been numerous safety concerns about infrastructure and Entergys willingness to further invest in the aging power plant. There are cracks in the reactors, leaking underground pipes, contaminated areas which will already be uninhabitable for the forseeable future.

In Massachusetts we have already had one nuclear power plant fail and contaminate the Housatonic River, which GE is still being sued over 25 years later. You cannot fish or swim there and there are signs posted everywhere reminding you to stay away. Ground water in the area is contaminated and people who used to live along the banks of the Housatonic have mostly moved away. I for one certainly hope the NRC stays out of this and lets the people of Vermont decide whether or not they are willing to pay a little less for electricity and risk public safety, or to have the plant decommissioned as planned. I am not a resident of VT, but I live within 50 miles of the plant directly on the Connecticut River which the plant resides. Let the people decide, not the corporations.

Vermont wouldn't happen to export the electricity from that plant, would they? what the heck is in Vermont that needs a nuclear power plant?

I would guess that some of the electricity is exported to New Hampshire and/or Massachusetts, being that it is so close to both borders. I personally would like to see it closed down, with the number of problems they've had with it combined with it's age. I'd also like to see the Plymouth Yankee closed, and maybe even some thought should be put into new plants in place of the Seabrook Power Plant.

VT does export some of the power to MA and NH, but one of the major sources of income for the plant is from the US Military. They buy up spent fuel rods for use in missiles like the ones recently used in Iraq.

And VT is the "green" state.

dribble- not anyone elses , just my weekly post

the question we need to ask , is how much money our politicians receive from the nuclear lobby , to even consider building new nuclear power plants .

bah. we need to ask if we lose too much energy just transmitting from it's generation point to it's point of usage.

I'm a contractor for VT Yankee and it's parent Entergy. I do not have any role that would involve nuclear fuel or power production.

I live in Vermont.

I have family that is in the "failure radius" if something ever happened that was catastrophic to cause a Chernobyl style event.

Based on what the news spins the "failures" into, VY looks many times worse then what actual condition is. Yes there were fish that tested positive for certain chemicals, but it's unknown where they came from. Furthermore, they were still well under allowed limits for exposure and consumption.

The cooling tower failure was due to the substructure, the cooling system was not the point of failure, it was what it was built on.

I can say this - the operators at Entergy that I know, whenever there is even a minute hickup, they are all over it like stink on fluff. Most of the staff at ENVY live in direct proximity to the plant.

The Vermont Yankee is nigh on 40 years old. While the history doesn't give any major concern, it does give me minor concern simply because the plant isn't getting any younger. I don't think it's going to deliver a Fukushima-like accident any time soon, but I'd also feel more comfortable with a newer plant with newer safty measures.

What is radation?

Meh I've lived near oyster creek generating station all my life, I'm normal. *twitch* iodide was given to us in 5 th grade? Its the oldest operational plant in the country.

wow, there are a lot of ignorant greenpeace wannabe's on here . . . comparing chernobyl to fukishima? please

lots of old plants can be kept operational past their original service life with proper maaintanence and upgrades.

I suspect that most of you nuke detractors would cringe at the thought of a coal plant replacing your nuke neighbors. Places like VT have nuclear power because fuel rods are a hell of a lot more portable than coal or natural gas.

I'd like to see where you derived the cost for solar power seeing as how there are now full scale solar plants in operation that even remotely approach the output of a large nuclear plant. Solar plants have to be built where the sun shines a lot and where real estate is cheap, i doubt if your cost per kW includes all of the x-country right of way costs to get those photons to market.

if enough people spend enough time crawling around with magnifying glasses, they will find mutated critters everywhere.

i need another beer

its a simple fact that big bulky buildings especially those under load , get old . if you add radiation to the mix , surely that increases the engineering issues