Died of fossil fuels, nuclear and hydro

Oil, gas, coal, nuclear (PWR, EPR, hot fusion, ITER), gas and coal thermal power plants, cogeneration, tri-generation. Peakoil, depletion, economics, technologies and geopolitical strategies. Prices, pollution, economic and social costs ...
User avatar
stipe
Éconologue good!
Éconologue good!
posts: 224
Registration: 07/01/11, 14:36
Location: Oise (60)




by stipe » 22/07/11, 10:50

pb2488 wrote:Who wrote this document? an anti-nuclear website?

yes, by people who have no children, moreover! : Shock: : Evil:
0 x
"the goal of every life is to end" !.
pb2488
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 837
Registration: 17/08/09, 13:04




by pb2488 » 22/07/11, 10:52

stipe wrote:
pb2488 wrote:Who wrote this document? an anti-nuclear website?

yes, by people who have no children, moreover! : Shock: : Evil:
No but no joke, do you have the source?
0 x
"The truth can not be defined as the majority opinion:
The truth is what follows from the observation of facts. "
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685




by Did67 » 22/07/11, 10:56

Being a father or grandfather does not protect you from taking reckless risks: how many fathers or grandfathers take the wheel completely drunk ???

More seriously :

a) risks are difficult to assess; therefore endless possible debates

b) in fine, we join a "debate of convictions"

c) and then, roughly and very simplified, there are two convictions:

1) those who think that even with a low statistical risk, the stake in nuclear power is enormous; therefore, you MUST do without; there is only without giving the means: savings + alternatives

2) those who think the risk is low and therefore, let's be optimistic, it will never happen; so let's continue ...

The first should be substantial and reduce their consumption of say 30% each (and the EdF market would automatically shrink and there would be no new power plants because electricity would not sell, we would close the older ones because too expensive to maintain in a situation of overproduction).

The latter should live 5 years at the end of the African bush to detoxify themselves from their "energy growth" which is an addiction like any other. Why would "always more" be better ??? Especially when I see the bullshit I see: commotion is not a useful move!
0 x
User avatar
stipe
Éconologue good!
Éconologue good!
posts: 224
Registration: 07/01/11, 14:36
Location: Oise (60)




by stipe » 22/07/11, 11:03

Without blaque what I know of the sources is written on the images ...


"Translated from xkcd.com/radiation for Sur-la-Toile.com" for the second, which also gives its sources (bottom left of the image, among others: www.nrc.gov

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sievert
and many others that I leave it to you to read for yourself;))
0 x
"the goal of every life is to end" !.
pb2488
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 837
Registration: 17/08/09, 13:04




by pb2488 » 22/07/11, 11:09

Did67 wrote:Being a father or grandfather does not protect you from taking reckless risks: how many fathers or grandfathers take the wheel completely drunk ???

It's not the same as being a manipulator / liar in the pay of a lobby.
Finally, I see a big difference !!!
0 x
"The truth can not be defined as the majority opinion:

The truth is what follows from the observation of facts. "
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79126
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10974




by Christophe » 22/07/11, 11:12

pb2488 wrote:They are surely dishonest and have no mood to endanger their family ...
This is also why they defend the climate .... :? :?
(Purchased by the nuclear lobby, but not by the oil lobby .... find the error?)


EdF does not count the "chronically irradiated" (in particular subcontractors) as an occupational disease, so they die in silence prematurely by not entering any statistics ...

It is not me who says it, nor anti nuclear, it is the interested parties themselves: https://www.econologie.com/forums/edf-et-la- ... t7513.html



We will see how many children (and adults) will get leukemia or other filth in Japan in 10-20 years ... Not necessarily counted by the nuclear lobby there is too much cash at stake!

Nuclear doesn't kill? So take your vacation to Japan in the North East preferably ... and don't forget to eat a lot of fruits and vegetables from the Fukushima region ...

The NY Academy of Sciences, which is not anti nuclear (if?), Speaks of a figure of 1 million deaths over 20 years following Chernobyl: https://www.econologie.com/tchernobyl-un ... -4351.html

How many for 50 years in Mayak? We will never know !!
https://www.econologie.com/forums/accident-n ... 10640.html



In a general way,pb you are starting to inflate us with your systematic spirit of contradiction, your pro nuke lobbies with two-bullet arguments ... and your pro "establishment" in general ...

You spoil the mood of this forum !
Given the time, the schedules and the will you spend there, I am starting to wonder if it is not voluntary ...

And that is why I will not respond to your private messages requesting an explanation ..."I am a poor victim, I come to cry at the modo".

You're as much on the tangent as Obamot!
0 x
pb2488
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 837
Registration: 17/08/09, 13:04




by pb2488 » 22/07/11, 11:36

Christophe wrote:And that is why I will not respond to your private messages requesting an explanation ..."I am a poor victim, I come to cry at the modo".
Quote these messages publicly, rather than comment on them.
0 x
"The truth can not be defined as the majority opinion:

The truth is what follows from the observation of facts. "
pb2488
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 837
Registration: 17/08/09, 13:04




by pb2488 » 22/07/11, 11:53

Christophe wrote:The NY Academy of Sciences, which is not anti nuclear (if?), Speaks of a figure of 1 million deaths over 20 years following Chernobyl: https://www.econologie.com/tchernobyl-un ... -4351.html
There, for me, it is a disturbing element because scientific and consensual, at least for this academy.
To see.
0 x
"The truth can not be defined as the majority opinion:

The truth is what follows from the observation of facts. "
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79126
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10974




by Christophe » 22/07/11, 12:10

pb2488 wrote:There, for me, it is a disturbing element because scientific and consensual, at least for this academy.
To see.


Just see, we ask that! It is available for download: https://www.econologie.com/tchernobyl-co ... -4350.html or here http://www.nyas.org/Publications/Annals ... 3f44b3bfc1

But I suspect that you will find something to say (protocol, method, contradictory figures ...)
0 x
pb2488
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 837
Registration: 17/08/09, 13:04




by pb2488 » 22/07/11, 12:14

Ok but quote my last 2 MP since you don't want to answer it but you allow yourself to comment publicly.
Be impartial: You erase all traces of the abuse of some.
0 x
"The truth can not be defined as the majority opinion:

The truth is what follows from the observation of facts. "

Go back to "Fossil energies: oil, gas, coal and nuclear electricity (fission and fusion)"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 279 guests