Irresponsible Physicians Oppose Nucle...

Irresponsible Physicians Oppose Nuclear Energy

There are 268 comments on the Forbes.com story from Dec 15, 2013, titled Irresponsible Physicians Oppose Nuclear Energy. In it, Forbes.com reports that:

The Columbia Generating Station's nuclear power plant in Richland, Washington that, together with hydroelectric power, gives Washington State the lowest carbon, cleanest energy footprint in America, delivered with the lowest cost per kWhr of any state.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Forbes.com.

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#145 Mar 10, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
Irresponsible ranting by nukists extends way back to "china syndrome."
Scram!
The best that the anti-nukes have to offer... a shlock movie. Par for their course.

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#146 Mar 10, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
“AVOID TOUCHING THE OUTSIDE AIR”
Can you say "ridiculous"?
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#147 Mar 11, 2014
KitemanSA wrote:
<quoted text> The best that the anti-nukes have to offer... a shlock movie. Par for their course.
You are ignorant of the nuclear reactors. China syndrome is a term in nuclear reactor safety.

You defend what you don't know.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#148 Mar 11, 2014
KitemanSA wrote:
<quoted text> Can you say "ridiculous"?
Can you say heartless?

They are people, too.
BDV

Atlanta, GA

#149 Mar 11, 2014
A case of hysteria without basis in reality. Those who know that hysteria was unfounded, but promote it for profit are not heartless?
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#150 Mar 11, 2014
The issue is less of nuclear power but forcing a generation of SAFE nuclear power. The currently dominant 'light water' reactors cannot be MADE safe, and were designed for submarines where cooling water is all around them.

I do not support UNSAFE light water reactors but we NEED the next generation of safe nuclear if we are to counter AGW and climate disruption while building renewable energy.

But you will notice that these postings always degenerate into mud slinging contests instead of debating the facts.
Dan

Upton, NY

#151 Mar 12, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>You are ignorant of the nuclear reactors. China syndrome is a term in nuclear reactor safety.
You defend what you don't know.
It is not a term used in reactor safety. It was made as an off hand comment in a 1971 discussion on the "theoretical" problems of a nuclear reactor by Ralph Lapp who was a Physicist who worked on the Manhattan project. He fully understood that the core would not reach China as a result of a complete core meltdown in the US.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#152 Mar 12, 2014
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
It is not a term used in reactor safety. It was made as an off hand comment in a 1971 discussion on the "theoretical" problems of a nuclear reactor by Ralph Lapp who was a Physicist who worked on the Manhattan project. He fully understood that the core would not reach China as a result of a complete core meltdown in the US.
I disagree with you. How else a movie was named the same?

Because the whole nuclear safety community referred to it as a possibility at a time China was denied UN membership, etc. and the Three Mile Island core melt.

Changing history does not help this industry with its faults and successes.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#153 Mar 12, 2014
before the Three Mile Island core melt.[corrected]
Dan

Upton, NY

#154 Mar 13, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>I disagree with you. How else a movie was named the same?
Because the whole nuclear safety community referred to it as a possibility at a time China was denied UN membership, etc. and the Three Mile Island core melt.
Changing history does not help this industry with its faults and successes.
Gee what a surprise that you disagree. To put your own words back at you. "Do the research"
SpaceBlues

United States

#155 Mar 13, 2014
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Gee what a surprise that you disagree. To put your own words back at you. "Do the research"
LOL. Take up skills to research yourself.

I know it well. You are changing history when you speak about one man, only. You lack logic and knowledge.

Wow. Read my post again. You can't change history.
Dan

Upton, NY

#156 Mar 13, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>LOL. Take up skills to research yourself.
I know it well. You are changing history when you speak about one man, only. You lack logic and knowledge.
Wow. Read my post again. You can't change history.
I did the research
From info.com
"The expression China Syndrome originated in a discussion on the theoretical problems of a nuclear reactor. A scientist commented that if the reactor were to undergo a meltdown, the molten core could bore a hole through the earth, coming out—if one happened to be standing in America—in China.

Ever since then, this scenario has been nicknamed the China Syndrome. Although the scientist was grossly exaggerating, some people took him seriously. In fact, the core would bore a hole about 30 feet into the earth, but this would have grave repercussions for the small distance."
From Wiki
"China Syndrome" is a fanciful term—not intended to be taken literally—that describes a fictional worst-case result of a nuclear meltdown, where reactor components melt through their containment structures and into the underlying earth, "all the way to China."

"Ralph Eugene Lapp (August 24, 1917 – September 7, 2004) was an American physicist who participated in the Manhattan Project.

He was born in Buffalo, New York, and attended the University of Chicago. After completing his graduate studies at the University he joined the Manhattan Project; and became the assistant Director of the Metallurgical Laboratory. He then accepted a position with the War department General Staff as a scientific advisor on atomic energy. When the research and development board was formed, Doctor Lapp became executive director of its committee on atomic energy. After this he acted as Head of the Nuclear Physics branch of the Office of Naval Research. He wrote Nuclear Radiation Biology, A Nuclear Reference Manual, Must We Hide ?, and assisted Doctor H.L. Andrews from the National Institute of Health in writing Nuclear Radiation Physics. He became an activist later in life and wrote a book, Victims Of The Super Bomb (1957).

In his book The New Priesthood: The Scientific Elite and The Uses of Power, Lapp describes the increase in funding for science and the growing influence of scientists in American politics after the invention of the atomic bomb.

Mr. Lapp was interviewed by Mike Wallace in 1957.[1]

In 1971, he coined the expression "China Syndrome."

And there are many more, not trying to change history. Just correcting your statement that this terminology is part of the nuclear power vernacular as it relates to safety basis and accident response. I am a radiation protection specialist and have been involved in emergency response for radiation protection including the field of nuclear power for over 30 years. This term is never used contrary to I am sure your extreme expertise and experience in this area. The last thing I need is some uninformed mouth piece telling me what the truth is, when you wouldn't recognize it if it walked up and bit you.
Dan

Upton, NY

#157 Mar 13, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>LOL. Take up skills to research yourself.
I know it well. You are changing history when you speak about one man, only. You lack logic and knowledge.
Wow. Read my post again. You can't change history.
By the way notice the dates.
Coined term 1971
China Syndrome movie 1979
You think the writers thought this was a great title for a movie, of course they did.
Dan

Upton, NY

#158 Mar 13, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>I disagree with you. How else a movie was named the same?
Because the whole nuclear safety community referred to it as a possibility at a time China was denied UN membership, etc. and the Three Mile Island core melt.
Changing history does not help this industry with its faults and successes.
China was denied membership to the UN because nuclear safety community talked about a possible "China Syndrome" What do you smoke down there in Houston???
China has been a member state of the UN since 1945 and was identified as the Republic of China (ROC). In 49 Mao created the People's Republic of China (PRC). At that time the ROC moved to Taiwan after losing the civil war. In 1971 the UN officially recognized the PRC as the only legitimate government of China. That is the history of membership so where do you get this denying of membership? It is funny how someone who keeps saying "changing history does not help" seems to be the only one who is trying to change history.
SpaceBlues

United States

#159 Mar 13, 2014
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
By the way notice the dates.
Coined term 1971
China Syndrome movie 1979
You think the writers thought this was a great title for a movie, of course they did.
Listen, you don't know much. But you confirm.
SpaceBlues

United States

#160 Mar 13, 2014
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
China was denied membership to the UN because nuclear safety community talked about a possible "China Syndrome" What do you smoke down there in Houston???
.. who is trying to change history.
Go read my post.

You are running on fake assumptions.
SpaceBlues

United States

#161 Mar 13, 2014
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
I did the research
From info.com
..
blah blah you are clueless.

You were all along.
SpaceBlues

United States

#162 Mar 13, 2014
Because the whole nuclear safety community referred to it as a possibility at a time when China was being denied UN membership, etc. and before the Three Mile Island core melt.[summary statement]
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#163 Mar 13, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>I disagree with you. How else a movie was named the same?
Because the whole nuclear safety community referred to it as a possibility at a time China was denied UN membership, etc. and the Three Mile Island core melt.
Changing history does not help this industry with its faults and successes.
It isn't a term used in discussing reactor safety purely because the design of the reactor is about preventing meltdown itself.

The 'China Syndrome' is a term applied to reactor safety though, as you say. It is the risk that the fissile elements in a reactor meltdown will stay unmixed with diluents and form a self sustaining 'drill' down below the reactor, possibly to the lithosphere.

Dan, since it is defined, it can be used in speaking of reactors. However, all experience so far says that the reactor core will dissolve other material until the fissile elements are too diluted to keep the mass above the melting point. On the other hand, explain ball lightning.. maybe it is a one in a thousand chance..

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#164 Mar 13, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>You are ignorant of the nuclear reactors. China syndrome is a term in nuclear reactor safety.
You defend what you don't know.
I was invited to be a nuclear instructor at a Navy school. I think maybe you are the ignorant one.
The "China Syndrome is a hypothetical condition that has never happened and by most calculations CAN never happen, at least to the devastating effect claimed by anti-nukes. It was a schlock movie.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Alternative Energy Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Coalition's 'war on solar' has sector cutting b... 9 hr Solarman 1
News Marin Clean Energy to cut electricity rates abo... 9 hr Solarman 1
News The push for solar energy takes flight Sat Solarman 1
News Solar power: Is it right for you? Sat Solarman 1
News High Desert residents struggle with wind turbin... (Mar '10) Sat Solarman 25
News Warner dusts off 55 mph Speed Limit (Jul '08) Sat litesong 60
News Solar company leaves trail of unhappy customers... Sat Dying Smoker 2
More from around the web