Where does the forum stand on nuclear power?

[Boboulas]

Wanted to get some perspectives on what everyone thinks of nuclear power.

Should we use it?

Get rid of it?

50/50?

[ClichéGuevara]

50/50

For an alternative energy source to fossil fuels - yes. Weapons - no.

Of course there are still a lot of issues surrounding it's use as a fuel, though. Such as dealing with waste.

[Djoser]

Don't know what to say about it energy-wise. Don't we already have safer and cleaner energy sources but just don't invest in them?

[Fuzzly Bear]

I read something saying that, with all the closures of these old school power plants, the UK is going to have a problem with energy supply in the next ten years or so

[El Mono]

Most of my physicist friends claim it's the way forward. It'll lead to the whole Type I civilisation process, if possible?

Quote:You mean a type 1 Civilization, I presume? I'd give us another century. We already control rivers and coastlines. That's a start on our way to a thorough program of geo-engineering, where we tap the thermal energy of volcanoes and exploit the cyclonic energy of hurricanes, and extract the tensile energy of earthquakes.

-Neil Degrasse Tyson

[Theory from theorical physicist Michio Kaku]
http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=5570

[The Vegan Marxist]

I'm definitely for it. Until we can perfect geo-engineering, nuclear energy is our greatest chance in combating against climate change. No other current energy source has the capacity as nuclear does without taking up too much land (which in itself would then negatively affect our environment).

[Boboulas]

I think I'm in agreement with most people here. It seems that human laziness in enforcing regulation and basically, just not taking nuclear safety seriously is what causes most accidents and meltdowns. If we really want to utilize nuclear energy we have to start being serious about enforcing regulations and safety procedures. Case in point being Japan, who almost caused the worst nuclear disaster since Hiroshima. Countries that don't take safety seriously need to be penalized.

---

On a side note, nuclear power plants need updating! Most of them are 20 or 30 years old. There are design flaws in old reactors that may not increase the likelihood of a meltdown but they could exacerbate the damage caused by one.

[Chino]

im more netural on a topic such as this one, but i think nuclear energy is the way to go, if they can improve on its design flaws

(03-15-2012 12:23 PM)Boboulas Wrote:  On a side note, nuclear power plants need updating! Most of them are 20 or 30 years old. There are design flaws in old reactors that may not increase the likelihood of a meltdown but they could exacerbate the damage caused by one.

didnt something like that cause Chernobyl?

[Boboulas]

Chernobyl was caused by a whole series of human mistakes, every one of them had to go wrong for it to turn out like it did.

[The Vegan Marxist]

(03-15-2012 03:26 PM)Boboulas Wrote:  Chernobyl was caused by a whole series of human mistakes, every one of them had to go wrong for it to turn out like it did.

Indeed. And even then, there was so much media hype behind the whole Chernobyl ordeal (whether or not because it had something to do with the Soviet Union is a matter of one's opinion) that death figures resulting from the accident is so large and misleading that we're now claiming that tens, if not hundreds of thousands of people have died because of it. Fact of the matter, though, is that the actual death toll was under 50.

The anti-nuclear energy activists are controlled by emotion, not actual science. Just as the anti-nuclear energy lobbyists are controlled by profit, given that the only real current alternative to nuclear is either coal or oil, both of which are massive profit accumulators.

United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation Wrote:"Among the 173-page report's major findings:

- 134 plant staff and emergency workers suffered acute radiation syndrome (ARS) from high doses of radiation

- In the first few months after the accident 28 of them died

- Although another 19 ARS survivors had died by 2006, those deaths had different causes not usually associated with radiation exposure, the report said

- Skin injuries and radiation-related cataracts were among the most common consequences in ARS survivors

- Although several hundred thousand people, as well as the emergency workers, were involved in recovery operations, there is no consistent evidence of health effects that can be attributed to radiation exposure, apart from indications of increased incidence of leukemia and of cataracts among those who received higher doses."

http://www.unis.unvienna.org/unis/en/pre...nf398.html

---

Now, let's compare this to coal (since we already know for a fact the environmental degradation oil brings to this planet). According to the Chinese govt. 2,433 people died in 2010 alone because of coal mine accidents. Keep this in mind. This isn't just accidents or exposures, but actual deaths! Statistically speaking, according to the provided figures by the Chinese govt., this would mean that at least 6 people are killed in these coal mines everyday!

http://english.people.com.cn/90001/90776...02254.html

Never has nuclear energy contributed in such high amount of deaths. In fact, nuclear energy hasn't even made its way to the hundreds yet, let alone the thousands or tens of thousands, in which both coal and oil have done by themselves!

In fact, again according to China's figures in coal mining death toll of 2010, this would mean that a single week of coal mining deaths are equivalent to the entire 25 years of witnessed death due to the Chernobyl explosion! That's how dangerous coal is in comparison to nuclear. And is reason alone why nuclear must be supported, or else either coal or oil take its place in mass energy accumulation.

[Boboulas]

I don't think the main argument is the death tolls of one or the other but the ecological impact. The media certainly wasn't wrong about the fact that the Chernobyl meltdown irradiated land hundreds of miles away from the plant, which is what Fukushima came close to (Although it would have been far worse)

[1871]

Quote:Chernobyl death toll grossly underestimated
On this page

The real face of the nuclear industry
Support us
Feature story - April 18, 2006
A new Greenpeace report has revealed that the full consequences of the Chernobyl disaster could top a quarter of a million cancer cases and nearly 100,000 fatal cancers.

zoom
In the cancer ward of a Kiev hospital in the Ukraine, 19-year-old Elena is being treated for her second case of thyroid cancer in just 3 years

Our report involved 52 respected scientists and includesinformation never before published in English. It challenges the UN International Atomic Energy Agency Chernobyl Forum report, which predicted 4,000 additional deaths attributable to the accident as a gross simplification of the real breadth of human suffering.

The new data, based on Belarus national cancer statistics, predicts approximately 270,000 cancers and 93,000 fatal cancer cases caused by Chernobyl. The report also concludes that on the basis of demographic data, during the last 15 years, 60,000 people have additionally died in Russia because of the Chernobyl accident, and estimates of the total death toll for the Ukraine and Belarus could reach another 140,000.

The report also looks into the ongoing health impacts of Chernobyl and concludes that radiation from the disaster has had a devastating effect on survivors; damaging immune and endocrine systems, leading to accelerated ageing, cardiovascular and blood illnesses, psychological illnesses, chromosomal aberrations and an increase in foetal deformations.

The real face of the nuclear industry

Each one of these statistics has a face. Many people are paying a price for the negligence of a dirty and dangerous industry:



This is just a selection of pictures from a new photography exhibit opening in 30 cities worldwide. The exhibition features poignant portraits of individuals and families, and the stories of their suffering due to Chernobyl and other nuclear disasters.

Greenpeace statement on the anniversary of Chernobyl, from Executive Director Gerd Leipold
These powerful images are a timely reminder that human lives are more than just numbers. For each statistic there is a person paying the ultimate price. Anyone who doubts the dangers of nuclear power should visit the exhibition and see for themselves one of the reasons why we oppose nuclear power. Twenty years on, every nuclear power plant bears the legacy of the nuclear industry's victims; and every nuclear power plant represents the threat of becoming the next Chernobyl.

As far as death tolls and illnesses go with regard to nuclear accidents you'd have to compare incidents of cases of cancer and leukemia prior to the accident compared to the same for after

From a more conservative report;



The Effects of the Accident on Human Health

The full extent of the effects of the Chernobyl accident on human health is difficult to assess and remains controversial.

800,000 people, known as liquidators, were involved in the clean up after the accident. According to figures previously issued by government agencies in Belarus, Ukraine and Russia, about 25 000 of the liquidators have so far died as a result of their exposure to radiation. According to the Liquidators’ Committee, the total number of deaths is 100 000.

Thyroid cancer

Thyroid cancer is caused by the absorbtion of radio-iodine into the thyroid gland. In the case of all those living close to Chernobyl this was exacerbated by endemic iodine deficiency. The thyroid hormone, normally produced by this gland, regulates growth and physical and mental development. Children who develop thyroid cancer and must have the gland removed, need to take thyroxin for the rest of their lives.

In the ten years before the Chernobyl accident, just seven children contracted thyroid cancer in Belarus. Within four years of the accident this level had risen by 30 times, but it was not until 1995 that the World Health Organisaiton (WHO) officially recognised the link between radiation from Chernobyl and thyroid cancer.

It was the Gomel Region which was most heavily affected by the fallout of Iodine-131 and children under 4 years old ingested the highest doses. The greatest number of thyroid cancers have occurred in this region and now the (WHO) predicts that one third of all the children from the area around Gomel aged between 0 and 4 at the time of the accident will develop thyroid cancer during their lifetime – a total of 50,000 children in this group alone.

A total of 4,000 people, mostly children and adolescents who were living in the most severely contaminated areas at the time of the accident, have already contracted cancer of the thyroid because of the reactor disaster.

Leukaemia in children and adults

Leukaemia statistics have been the most controversial of all the health effects of the accident. In the Gomel region an increase in leukaemia cases of about 50 per cent compared to the period before the disaster was recorded in both children and adults, in the early years following the accident, according to the clinics responsible.

These figures run counter to the Conclusions of the 3rd International Conference “Health Effects of the Chernobyl Accident”, held in Kiev in June 2001. There, many researchers reported that there was no significant increase in cases of childhood or adult leukaemia in the contaminated territories of the three countries affected. It is most likely that there was a rise in the early years and the numbers have now reduced.

Other cancers

A statistical survey by doctors from the area around Gomel in Belarus showed that of every 100 000 people in the area, 240 would normally be expected to develop cancer; this figure has now risen to 346. The increase is greatest in the most severely contaminated districts of the Gomel Region – Vetka, Bragin, Khoiniki and Narovlya. Men have most commonly developed tumours of the lungs, stomach, skin and prostate. Women primarily have tumours of the breast, uterus, stomach and skin

In December 2004 the ‘Swiss Medical Weekly’ published findings from the Clinical Institute of Radiation Medicine and Endocrinology Research, in Minsk, showing a 40% increase in cancer between 1990 and 2000. The researchers used data from the National Cancer Registry, established in 1973.

An increased incidence of breast cancer as a direct consequence of the accident has also been recognised internationally. The number of cases has doubled in the area around Gomel in Belarus – one of the most severely contaminated territories. Belarusian and Ukrainian scientists also predict further increases in urogenital tumours and lung and stomach cancer, both among the liquidators and in the general male population of the severely contaminated areas This prediction is supported by cancer specialists in other countries

Other diseases in children

United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) analysed health statistics in Belarus and showed increases between 1990 and 1994 of:

disorders of the nervous system 43 %

cardiovascular diseases 43 %

gastrointestinal diseases 28 %

disorders of bone, muscle and connective tissue 62 %

diabetes 28 %

It is difficult to be sure how many of these diseases were caused by Chernobyl. Children have been evacuated from the contaminated areas to live in Minsk and other cities in the cleaner parts of the country, and their health problems are not always carefully followed up. And contaminated food is distributed around the country also, making it difficult to compare children from contaminated and cleaner areas.

It has been reported that the incidence of juvenile-onset diabetes is markedly higher in the contaminated parts of the country, compared to the period before the accident. In the scientific literature, it has been suggested that this could be a consequence of exposure of the pancreas to radioactive iodine.

Scientists in Belarus have looked at the build up of caesium in the organs of the body, particularly the heart, and concluded that this could account for the recorded rises in heart disease in both children and adults..

The effects of radiation on pregnancy

The rapidly dividing cells of a foetus are particularly prone to damage from radiation.


Within a short time after the nuclear disaster, a sharp increase in reproductive disorders – predominantly affecting pregnancy – was seen in Ukraine and Belarus. For the 1986-1990 period, the Ministry of Health in Ukraine recorded an increased number of miscarriages, premature births and stillbirths, as well as three times the normal rate of deformities and developmental abnormalities in newborns


General Health of the Population



There is no doubt among national and international experts that the state of health of the people in the contaminated territories is extremely poor. But a number of other causes are cited besides the radiation: poverty, poor diet and living conditions.

Many of the children who do not have serious illness, nevertheless have damaged immune systems. In the more serious cases, rogue antibodies attack the body in what is known as an autoimmune response. They fail to recognise the body’s own tissue and treat it as an enemy in the same way that normal antibodies attack foreign infections.

After the Chernobyl disaster, a massive increase in non-malignant diseases was also observed in the population,” wrote the German specialist in radiation medicine Edmund Lengfelder 15 years after the accident. The Ukrainian government agency Chernobyl Interinform in Kiev reported in March 2002 that 84 per cent of the three million people in Ukraine who had been exposed to radiation were registered as sick. These include one million children.

For more information go to http://www.chernobyl.info


................................................................................​...................

As far as whats good for the environment/ecology - - whats bad for human health is also bad for the environment.