ITER = Nuclear Salvation
I pretty much signed up so I could get this out. The ITER that greenpeace is protesting is easily the best solution we have for alternative fuel and for power. The article about it states information that pertains to fusion reactors and it is evident that whoever wrote it didn't even bother to research nuclear fusion.
The article states that nuclear fusion will give off harmful radioactive waste. Sadly this is not true since fusion is a clean process that uses tritium and deuterium, not plutonium and uranium.
It also says that this mythical "nuclear waste" that it produces would be used to make nuclear weapons. As mentioned above, this is not possible. They pretty muched based all of their arguements off of fission reactors.
A single fusion reactor would be able to power 1/3 of the US for a virtually infinite amount of time, because once the reaction is able to sustain itself, it can last for as long as we wish for it to operate.
The fact that greenpeace opposes it shows how informed they are of some of the issues they protest against, and shows their unwillingness to do actual research on it As far as I can tell, some idiot probably saw the word "Nuclear" in the name and went nuts because they don't know jack about anything in nuclear fusion. What a great uninformed organization.
Recent Posts
Comments (10)
Leave a comment
You must have a Greenpeace or Facebook account and be logged in to post comments.
Please log in
or create an account to share your comments
or connect with facebook:
About Me
steelviper
Student at University of Texas at Austin
Dripping Springs, TX USA
Screw Greenpeace and screw hybrids. They only convert air pollution into ground pollution. Fusion reactors rule. I have canines and eat animals. E85 puts out twice as many hydrocarbons as gas, and cars get less fuel economy with e85 compared with their gas counterparts. Tesla's new roadster (electric) and Caparo's new T1 (lightweight cost effective exotic materials demonstrator and future king of supercars) are the types of cars we should be driving. Lightweight, fast, aerodynamic, yet still get really good mileage, and able to withstand 200mph crashes (The Caparo). 51% of all automibiles on the road today are trucks, and this has got to change. Stop driving trucks (they aren't fun to drive anyway), stop making large heavy cars for fat people, as punishment for them being fat, because studies show that cars with fat people in them get worse gas mileage then the same car with me in it.
Your Personal Activist Network
Archives
February 2007 (1)
November 2006 (1)
April 2006 (1)
- more...
Where the hell are you getting your information from?
First of all, i never said anything about FUSION. Fusion is the fusing of atoms. Since we've yet to muster up the energy to complete such a process, little is known about what could happen.
My entire article was on FISSION you idiot. Fission is the splitting of an atom. When you split the atom, you are left with new (not new elements, just an element that differes from the original) radioactive elements that we have no use for.
Next time before you try to come onto a blog and try to look/act smart, do some research. There are people (myself included) who have done research on this.
On the other hand, you are from texas, so I suppose we should expect nothing less.
The whole point of that original entry was not about fusion. It was about FISSION. As we know it, fission reactions create harmful radioactive waste that remains radioactive for thousands of years. That was the point I was making. You obviously have NOT done your research.
If you don't believe there was a tritium leak, look up any recent articles about the nuclear power plant in Braidwood, Illinois.
I have found multiple articles:
http://www.watertechonline.com/News.asp?mode=4&N_ID=60454
And this:
http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-tritium17.html
look at the bottom of the 2nd article.
There you have it. Tritium, a WASTE product of nuclear fission reactions, leaked into the surrounding town's ground water on EIGHT SEPARATE OCCAISIONS.
You clearly have NOT done your research.
Don't tell me I'm wrong. I live here.
I know what happened, I know that there is an elevated risk of cancer in the surrounding area. If the water wasn't safe to drink, then there is a problem. Nuclear power is just not safe, so please, stop trying.
If you truly honestly believe that I'm wrong, then I implore you to come to here, specifically braidwood, and live there for a while. While you're at it, have a couple cups of their local ground water.
Tritium is not involved in the reaction. It is found in the water they use, and is also found in water all over the world since it is a naturally ocurring isotope. I happily drank some of my poorly processed sulfer-saturated water I got a dose of it. Remember that you do live near a nuclear power plant, and the radiation emmitted from the plant is probably the reason for the increased cancer rate there. I have been to a powerplant before, and the radiation given off from it had altered the structure of the grass in the area, causing it to grow curly instead of straight. I'm sure that tritium, weakest of radionuclides, that naturally occurs in the environment, is going to be the reason for an increase in cancer rate(especially since it emits only one beta particle before becoming harmless). Not the radiation given off by the powerplant.
I'm no scientist, but logic would typically tell us that if there's a pipe carrying TRITIUM away from the plant, then chances are, something is producing the tritium. Why would anyone make that up? Did you not read the news articles?
Do you think they made that up just to scare people? That's kind of stupid. Obviously there is reason for concern or it wouldn't be played off as a big deal. It was obviously enough of a concern that they needed to shut off power to towns miles away to examine the incident.
I've read tons of articles and all of them say the same thing, "Tritium from the reactor" or, "Tritium from a pipe line" and "on 8 different occasions".
Stop trying to parade this whole idea that it's 100% safe and what not, it' not safe at all. If it was, there'd be no opposition. While no source of energy is ever going to be 100% be safe, we can try our best. Nuclear power is nuclear bomb waiting to go off. There's no end to the amount of things that can go wrong.
Stop showing off your knowledge of equations, stop promoting a lie, and stop wasting everyone's time.
I'm not wasting everyone's time. You chose to waste your time by reading it. I didn't force you to do it.
Oh yeah and greenpeace is still uninformed about ITER. This is apparent with the arguements they used against it in their article.
Sincerely,
Justin
ITER, the true savior of clean energy was just delayed again, yet again so now they're saying they won't achieve first plasma by 2018.
How long did it take 1 nation to achieve nuclear fission? Oh yeah, 3 years. But a team of all nations with modern computers after already delaying 20 years says they can't do it in 8? please.