Browser
|
| posted on 3/4/04 at 01:46 PM |
|
|
Thought provoker
Have a look here Ghost Town next time you are at a loose end.
|
|
|
|
|
Staple balls
|
| posted on 3/4/04 at 01:57 PM |
|
|
saw that a while ago
very spooky indeed
|
|
|
theconrodkid
|
| posted on 3/4/04 at 03:45 PM |
|
|
looks like where i live
who cares who wins
pass the pork pies
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 3/4/04 at 03:59 PM |
|
|
good link. but is the lady brave or foolish? wouldn't catch me there without a rad suit...
|
|
|
Jasper
|
| posted on 3/4/04 at 04:12 PM |
|
|
Crazy ........
|
|
|
Peteff
|
| posted on 3/4/04 at 04:23 PM |
|
|
I read this a while back on a bike site I visit. I like the bit about the endurance of cockroaches and the comparison to chickens. At least we know
there will be something left to eat when the nuclear winter hits. KFC will have a new meaning. I remember when it happened there were fears for the
safety of livestock in Scotland as the contamination spread that far in prevailing weather conditions.
yours, Pete
I went into the RSPCA office the other day. It was so small you could hardly swing a cat in there.
|
|
|
macspeedy
|
| posted on 3/4/04 at 07:46 PM |
|
|
we were told not to drink the rain water at school!!
|
|
|
nicklondon
|
| posted on 3/4/04 at 07:55 PM |
|
|
makes depressing reading,just can't imagine the horror that one "accident"caused.
|
|
|
Hellfire
|
 posted on 3/4/04 at 07:59 PM |
|
|
Lost for words....
If that is true (and it seems genuine) I think it's a lesson to us all about Nuclear Power.
|
|
|
nicklondon
|
| posted on 3/4/04 at 08:06 PM |
|
|
hope security is tight around our plants with the current terrorist threat.
|
|
|
andyps
|
| posted on 3/4/04 at 08:14 PM |
|
|
What is her life expectancy if she keeps visiting there?
Andy
An expert is someone who knows more and more about less and less
|
|
|
stephen_gusterson
|
| posted on 3/4/04 at 10:22 PM |
|
|
nuclear power (as long as its not near you) is a really GOOD thing.
In fact, one day it may be all we have.
when the fossil fuels all run out, nuclear will still be here.
The alternatives are windmills everywhere, and when they are efficent, solar panels everywhere. Masses of the things, just to replace one power
station.
Im certainly no expert, but I work every day with radiation - in the form of X-rays.
Its gamma radiation, generated electronically via an x-ray tube, and is used for inspecting food for contamination such as metal, glass, stone, bone,
etc. If you have ever eaten a mr kipling type apple pie, you would have eaten something thats been thro one of my designs.
xray tubes, once the power is removed, generate no radiation at all and they can be held in the hand - they are just glass, copper, and tungsten.
Food thats been inspected by xray has such tiny amounts of rays pased thro, you cant even measure it. The process is alot like an airport baggage
machine - doesnt fog film cos of the low levels and low time spent in the beam
things dont become radioactive - they become contaminated. When a nuke or a power station explodes, it throws out actual peices of atomic material -
in the form of dust and small fragments. An isotope the size of this . dot can penetrate over a foot of steel.
Contamination occurs when you get a little bit of material on your body, or breathe it in. Thats why she is worried about kicking up dust.
Radiation is high and low on her meter in certain spots as she approaches a radioactive particle. And who knows where a particular one may fall.
Radiation obeys inverse square law - double your distance from it, and you get 25% of the dose.
there are different measurements of radiation - the common one in the UK is the sievert. A dose of one sievert for an hour will give a 50% chance of
death.
Any machine in the uk producing radiation where the public can be must emit 1 micro seivert - or one millionth of that level. The limit in the USA is
5, and germany 7. So germans are 7x more able to resist radiation..... I think not.
Its because there are no hard and fast rules. All the does levels are based on statistical data gathered from japan atomic bombs, and other incidents.
They calculate the dose and outcome, and find out the 'safe' limits from that.
The most prone part of the body to radiation is the eye. Cataracts are caused.
flying in a plane increases your dose by several 10's over normal - as the atmosphere is thinner and planes are made of low density metal.
As far as how long will she survive - its two factors.
First is if she gets contaminated with a particle. Get a direct peice of material on you for any length of time and you are a goner.
Second, is accumulated dose, and is something I have always found whacky.
apparently, the safe dose for a year can be had over a year or all at once. Thats a bit like Mike Tyson poking you gently 100 times or putting it all
in one punch. But according to scientists, not.
I worked with someone that used to use isotopes to look at welds in pressure vessels and oil pipleines. The tiny dot that emits the radiation is held
in a box about 300mm square, and its made of depleted uranium - non radioactive, but very dense material. When you set it up, a mechanical cable winds
the isotope out of the housing, whilst you hide from it.
sometimes, there is a mechanical failure. The isotope wont go back in. Solution? You and your mates all look at your dose recorsd so far for the year.
The one with the least then has a time, in seconds, calculated that he can spend with the dot of death, stuffing it back in the housing.
this seems stupid to me but its apparently normal practice.
This person was also involved using things called linear accelerators to inspect motorway bridges for internal corrosion. A normal medical x-ray is
about 80k electron volts. Ceasium is about 600k electron volts. A linac is 10 MILLION electron volts.
A 10 second dose at 30 feet was calculated to cause death in 3 or 4 days.
so, if the biker doesnt get directly contaminated, and keeps her accrued dose below accepted levels, shes probably gonna be ok.
However, the rule is not to expose yourself to any radiatin unless you need to.
atb
steve
]
[Edited on 3/4/04 by stephen_gusterson]
|
|
|
pbura
|
| posted on 3/4/04 at 10:58 PM |
|
|
Somber and haunting.
I hope we know what we're doing.
Pete
|
|
|
Hellfire
|
| posted on 3/4/04 at 11:05 PM |
|
|
Given the fact the nuclear energy may be our last viable source of power, it remains that it is still not effective and not economically maintainable.
We loose so much money on nuclear power... it's simply the waste that worries me and the harmful effects is can have on many living species
> Pictures<
The pictures are not edited but to some may be extremely distressing
Due to the time it takes for radioactive material to become safe - we will eventually run out of safe area's to store it. Unless, thats what all
this Mars exploration is for?
To be quite honest - it scares the sh*t out of me!
Other interesting reading... HERE
[Edited on 3-4-04 by Hellfire]
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 3/4/04 at 11:37 PM |
|
|
theres one really good place to put spent nuclear fuel in the solar system, a place that already full of the stuff and we have a nice shield from. The
SUN! but its a bit dangerous stuffing it into a rocket to get it there...
roll on safe space travel and its a good start.
but i think terrorists will stuff it all up anyway.
|
|
|
stephen_gusterson
|
| posted on 3/4/04 at 11:52 PM |
|
|
the reason its not economic is due to the fact that gas and cola is cheaper - gas in particular.
the natiojnal grid buys from whoever gives the cheapest quote for the day - and nuke stations are not as cheap as gas, and they have to undersell to
compete. meanwhile, all the gas that could be used for homes and cars is consumed. nuke isnt a portable fuel and we are wasting the portable fuel we
have.
nuke is very cost effective when you have nothing else.......
quote:
Originally posted by Hellfire
Given the fact the nuclear energy may be our last viable source of power, it remains that it is still not effective and not economically maintainable.
We loose so much money on nuclear power... it's simply the waste that worries me and the harmful effects is can have on many living species
> Pictures<
The pictures are not edited but to some may be extremely distressing
Due to the time it takes for radioactive material to become safe - we will eventually run out of safe area's to store it. Unless, thats what all
this Mars exploration is for?
To be quite honest - it scares the sh*t out of me!
Other interesting reading... HERE
[Edited on 3-4-04 by Hellfire]
|
|
|
Hellfire
|
| posted on 4/4/04 at 09:11 AM |
|
|
Very true Steve.... but surely, naturally sourced power eg wind (ah-hem), sun and wave is the way to go. Not to mention other alternative's. I
feel the worlds leading collective governments are not investing enough in looking for alternative to fossil fuel... it appears they would rather
spend vast amounts of money in fighting for what reserves there are.
I sound as though I'm a right 'greenie' which is incorrect. Just concerned - most of us have children who will inherit the world we
leave... I just hope it's still habitable!
After reading what I've just written - I'm not commenting on this subject further - it's too emotive!
[Edited on 4-4-04 by Hellfire]
|
|
|
tr
|
| posted on 4/4/04 at 09:37 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by stephen_gusterson
nuke isnt a portable fuel
You mean I'll never get my dream of a 'Nuclear Powered Indy' on the road?
There's nothing scary about nuclear fuel, it just has to be handled correctly. Don't put monkey's incharge. Having said that, it is
an expensive and complicated way of boiling water.
I was reading somewhere last week that at the current rate, Terrorism will finish us off before we run out of fossil fuels! Now theres a thought!
tr
|
|
|
Peteff
|
| posted on 4/4/04 at 10:19 AM |
|
|
gas and cola is cheaper
Is that Pepsi or Coke Steve? I always knew there'd be a use for that stuff somewhere apart from rotting teeth and cleaning coins. Is it the
gas in the cola?
yours, Pete
I went into the RSPCA office the other day. It was so small you could hardly swing a cat in there.
|
|
|
stephen_gusterson
|
| posted on 4/4/04 at 09:59 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Peteff
Is that Pepsi or Coke Steve? I always knew there'd be a use for that stuff somewhere apart from rotting teeth and cleaning coins. Is it the
gas in the cola?
yeah - i noticed that nice typo - but it was still true 
regarding alternative energy sources - we use gadzillion megawatts of electricity a day - lets look at the alternatives :
1. Wind - nice if its windy, not so good on a still summers day. Also big bloody ugly things that ruin the countryside. Wont be long untill the greens
start bitching about windmills too.
2. solar power. This is britain. nuff said. The greens would also bitch about all the panels dotting the countryside. When you need the most power in
the winter, solar would be at its worst.
3. wave power. without costal currents there would be all kinds of costal pollution as we wouldnt have the cleansing effects of the waves on the
shore. Likely to be barrages of turds offshore.
I think nuke stations are inevitable.
Just as one day people will curse Thatcher's short sightedness in closing 300 years worth of coal stocks down such that most pits are
itrretrievably flooded and shagged.
atb
steve
|
|
|
Peteff
|
| posted on 4/4/04 at 11:28 PM |
|
|
Wind - nice if its windy
The wind generators only need something like a 4mph wind to keep them turning and they are very calming to watch. They aren't going to be put in
places where everyone wants to go, so most of the objections will be from nimbys. Wave generators will be placed where the seas are rough enough to
power them without destroying them. Sewage is not being punted out to sea in the quantities it was previously now we are in the EU, more beaches are
being given awards than ever now
and it would probably stop some of the coastal erosion on the east coast. What was the Kursk powered by? There was enough worry about fallout from
that when it sank so nuclear power must be portable to some extent. It was first used in the forties by the Americans to power a sub called
Nautilus.
http://www.uic.com.au/nip32.htm look at this and see how much of this stuff is floating around
yours, Pete
I went into the RSPCA office the other day. It was so small you could hardly swing a cat in there.
|
|
|
stephen_gusterson
|
| posted on 5/4/04 at 10:24 AM |
|
|
nuclear subs and ships which are 0.001% of vehicles would be ok - what about portable nukes for cars?
crashes on the M25 wouldnt need to be on the radio - you would see the mushroom clouds from your window
I seriously wonder how many windmills it takes to replace a single multi megawatt power station......
atb
steve
|
|
|
Hellfire
|
| posted on 5/4/04 at 03:20 PM |
|
|
The Power of Guff...
There are two popular windmill manufacturers - both based in the Nordic Regions. I had much to do with the design of the rotors of these things and
they are awesome... The new windmills produce 2MW of power, so 12 windmills will produce the equivalent of 1 reactor at Sellafield. I'm not sure
as to actual cost of the things but in proportion I don't think too expensive!
|
|
|
Northy
|
| posted on 5/4/04 at 06:44 PM |
|
|
There are some windmills up the A19 near Sunderland, saw them on Sunday when I was up that way. Must say, personnaly I thought they were awesome, I
was told many times by the wife to look at the road! But then, I'm an engineer
Like the Eiffel Tower, when I saw that I though 'wow, thats awesome.' Some people think its an ugly lump of rusting steel.
That reminds me, must go see 'the angle of the north' before it rots away
Graham
Website under construction. Help greatfully received as I don't really know what I'm doing!
"If a man says something in the woods and there are no women there, is he still wrong?"
Built 2L 8 Valve Vx Powered Avon
|
|
|
Mark Allanson
|
| posted on 5/4/04 at 07:57 PM |
|
|
We have several wind farms in Cornwall, but I have often thought how much power a dam from Minehead to south wales would produce, you could generate
on both sides of the tides, and with a bit of thought and enclosed large lagoons, you could generate continuously.
Think how much nuclear waste you could hide in the construction too!
If you can keep you head, whilst all others around you are losing theirs, you are not fully aware of the situation
|
|
|
