View Single Post
  #54  
Old 03-24-2011
Tread's Avatar
Tread Tread is offline
Senior Ladyboy Lover
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 270
Tread is a glorious beacon of lightTread is a glorious beacon of lightTread is a glorious beacon of lightTread is a glorious beacon of lightTread is a glorious beacon of light
Default

Again you quote out of context and respond only what you wanted to read. The red text is what is missing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TracyCoxx View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tread View Post
The Unknown is what is not expected. Who would have expected 10 years ago that a passenger plane hits the Pentagon?
What if a happening like the one in Tunguska hits a nuclear plant? I know it?s very unlikely, but the outcome and especially the long term effects are absolutely unpredictable. Whole countries could be uninhabitable for 100,000?s of years.
Tunguska? Seriously? You're worried about a comet striking a nuclear power plant? You say very unlikely, but I still don't think you grasp how unlikely that is. And you're blowing the danger way out of proportion. Not 100,000s of years. More like decades - if this extremely unlikely event happened.
It was about the Unknown. Something unexpected that happen, or something known but stronger than expected happen. It is not about how likely one of the particular Unknown things happens, but more that there are many things that could unlikely happen to one of the many nuclear facilities which let accidents happen several times a year. Most of them without a resulting disaster, but it?s only a question of time.
I thought Tunguska is a good example because it is still unclear what happen and there are lots of exceptionally theories also Asteroid/Comet or Geophysical activity are the most supposable.
Terrorists could also fly into a building, the chances are comparable low. 3 out of 4 planes hit their target at 9.11. why not a nuclear plant?

If you think the effects are only decades long, you should tell that the people who plan to build a steel concrete Sarcophagus around the Chernobyl reactor. Temporary it should last for 1000 years, but that is only an intermediate step.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TracyCoxx View Post
As long as you build outside of tornado alley, and away from the gulf you'll do fine with the weather. And I'll give you another chance on figuring out how to avoid dangers from volcanoes lol.
Weather is much more than tornados and hurricanes. One example is that a drought could run dry rivers that are essential for the cooling of a nuclear plant.
Volcanoes are more than an eruption and lava. Your Yellowstone Caldera is out of tectonic faults and has the potential to change lakes, rivers and differences in highs of the area.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TracyCoxx View Post
Why not bury it in a subduction zone? Like 1000 ft down or so away from human activity. Even with a half life of 100,000s of years, there's no worries. It's taken down to the earth's mantle.
There is no proving what happens in a subduction zone. Everything is just a hypothesis. And near every subduction zone there is immense pressure, lots of earthquakes and volcanoes.
Drilling and weakening earth crust near high pressure magma could be like a man made volcano canal who could throw the radioactive waste out high into the air. (Or more visual: like a blain of radioactive waste, the pressure rises from two sides like fingers, and then it splatters all over the place).
Reply With Quote