Reviewed by EDF engineer on misinformation tf1

Books, television programs, films, magazines or music to share, counselor to discover ... Talk to news affecting in any way the econology, environment, energy, society, consumption (new laws or standards) ...
jonule
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2404
Registration: 15/03/05, 12:11




by jonule » 05/11/08, 13:28

what to understand by troll and degenerate?
I find that we debate rather well, especially as regards the use of alpha particles and their dissemination in the environment, right?
a debate also serves to get to the bottom of things ...

but hey if it is too scary (would France be scared? -) as much to admit that an alpha particle is stopped by a sheet of paper, that will be fine forum ? I just find it a bit of a shame, given their propagation in the environment, and the possibility of leaving room for other alternatives around this observation, "it was my opinion" ...

after that for sure, we see a whole bunch of electric gadgets coming, and every time there is the production of electricity at the base it's not my fault, the debate surely existed at the appearance of other electric means of transport like TGV? the technical choice between performance and transparency ...
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 05/11/08, 13:48

jonule wrote:what to understand by troll and degenerate?
I find that we debate rather well, especially as regards the use of alpha particles and their dissemination in the environment, right?
a debate also serves to get to the bottom of things ...


I am not saying that it is not good but that it is almost always the same with you ... and it tires ... especially when we have gaps in physics and that we propagate false truths because yes the paper stops certain particles ...
0 x
jonule
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2404
Registration: 15/03/05, 12:11




by jonule » 05/11/08, 14:57

well it's not my fault if there's no one else to discuss this, I'm not focused on it, I can even say that it's not my favorite niche, I prefer to talk about oil engine, electrolysis and electricity generator; if it is the same it is that the speech still has a foundation ...

after that bores me, what bores me is rather articles like "for ecological reasons australia prefers nuclear power plants according to an expert report" if you know what i mean ... i don't attacks anyone and yes there is something to be disgusted, but it is the alternatives that must be put forward; the case of Australia is convincing.

after I have deficiencies in Physics it can happen like everyone else, but hey it's still my basic curriculum, so ...
yes I heard at school that alpha particles were stopped by a sheet of paper, BUT while searching the net I also found that, which I put at the beginning of the subject, I think you don't haven't read:

Public health and environmental hazards

The alpha radiation emitted by plutonium has only a very short range. This is the reason why, in certain cases, it can be handled and stored without having to resort to too bulky radiological protection screens. Take, for example, a small amount of plutonium in the vicinity of a human being: most of the energy emitted by the plutonium would collide on the outer, non-living surface of the skin (assuming that '' there are no open wounds and no plutonium particles are aspirated).

If, on the other hand, if one or more particles of plutonium were sucked up, they could go to lodge in the sensitive tissues of the lungs, causing a lot of biological damage. When drawn into the lungs, a few milligrams of plutonium is enough to cause death in the months that follow. A much smaller amount can also lead to fatal lung cancer many years later. For this reason, plutonium is considered to be one of the most carcinogenic known substances ever produced by humans.


extract of :
http://www.cnp.ca/sn/questions/plutonium-bkfr.html

and I imagine that nobody has forgotten the ravages on our soldiers after the Gulf War, of the Gulf War syndrome, of the Balkans, due to the exposure to alpha particles inhaled due to the explosions of depleted uranium weapons?

don't tell me you forgot and want to hide it too? it would be a bit big anyway, and would hardly go unnoticed.

or do we have paper in the bronchi, just before the bronchioles and the blood gates?

I don't find that responsible, sorry.

so who is misinforming?

who has gaps?

Will the electric car run on plutonium or wind turbines?
0 x
C moa
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 704
Registration: 08/08/08, 09:49
Location: Algiers
x 9




by C moa » 05/11/08, 15:04

jonule wrote:
C moa wrote:Depending on the process (but not all) this helium atom may be radioactive, but in this case it is an alpha particle. This particle is very well known, easy to spot and just as easy to trap since a simple sheet of paper is enough to block it (nothing to do with gammas or neutrons). In addition, its half-life is quite short, so nothing to do with current particles either.

sorry i'm not telling anything, uranium and plutonium are alpha particles, i mean you are misinforming: we learn at school that a simple sheet of paper stops them, but when they are inhaled, they are carcinogenic and mutagenic, transmitted from generation to generation.

What you say is not entirely correct. Do not confuse alpha radiation with alpha particles. Generally we don't really make a difference but this is important.
In fact we consider alpha as a source of ionizing energy so on the one hand we have atoms like Pu which emit powerful ionizing radiation considered as alpha radiation and on the other we have atoms which release particles alpha during an alpha decay (an isotope of helium also called helion). These particles also emit ionizing radiation so they are also considered alpha.
For example, during the fission of uranium, there is production of helion (therefore of alpha particle, uranium is not itself an alpha), it is the same with radium which becomes a radon (but there it is done naturally).
In both cases, I repeat, the alpha rays are stopped by a sheet of paper.

So I repeat, in the context of the merger, there is creation (sometimes not all the time) of particles alpha, easy to trap and manage.

For your remark regarding inhalation or ingestion of alpha. It is true that it is dangerous and that is why when we work on equipment containing these particles, we use special clothing (MURUROA clothing) to protect workers.
well tried to try to call me a sucker as usual, but it doesn't take with those who look beyond their nose :frown:
It is absolutely not my goal (you know more than I do on other subjects) I would say that I rather try to give you information that will allow you to better know the radioactivity and therefore to be taken more seriously in your explanations. The problem is that you don't want to listen to what you are told and that you constantly think that I am lying or that I am trying to hide the truth (but you saw, I am patient :D ).
If I tell you that the merger does not create long-lived waste, you immediately say that I am having a bad time and you tell me about Pu when there is none in the context of the merger !!!

what do you mean by "fairly short half-life"?
It is one of the essential elements which characterizes the dangerousness of an element. For someone who claims to be informed, I am a little surprised that you do not know this term.
To put it simply, a radioactive element is an unstable element and as nature does not like instability, this element one day or another will be stable. Before becoming stable this element releases energy and this energy decreases as the particle "ages". To measure this loss of energy, we invented a unit of measurement called "the half-life time". This is the time taken by the particle to lose half of its energy. Thus, Pu has a half-life of 24000 years while radon has a half-life of 30 minutes. The particles emitted by the fusion will probably be close to those of radon !!!

Please don't question what I just told you, this unit is used by everyone and for all radioactive elements. You must have heard of carbon 14 bone dating, this dating uses this principle.
I'm not talking about fusion but the polluting activity of nuclear power plants, it's very different. I'm not talking about theory, but practice.
Maybe but there you deviate because I answered your question on the merger (see exchanges with cuicui)

so I'm talking nonsense? what do the others weigh then? I want to collect their opinions and keep quiet while waiting, but sorry when we hear "an alpha plutonium particle is stopped by a sheet of paper and is harmless" there is something to hallucinate! and we call ourselves experts in the matter? everyone gobbles?
Don't be displeased, radiation alpha of a Pu atom are stopped by a sheet of paper !!!! If you do not believe me, go on the internet, you will not have a site which will tell you that a radiation or an alpha particle passes through a wall or a glass (even your buddies to leave nuclear power must know it).
0 x
C moa
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 704
Registration: 08/08/08, 09:49
Location: Algiers
x 9




by C moa » 05/11/08, 15:11

jonule wrote:and I imagine that nobody has forgotten the ravages on our soldiers after the Gulf War, of the Gulf War syndrome, of the Balkans, due to the exposure to alpha particles inhaled due to the explosions of depleted uranium weapons?

don't tell me you forgot and want to hide it too? it would be a bit big anyway, and would hardly go unnoticed.

or do we have paper in the bronchi, just before the bronchioles and the blood gates?

I don't find that responsible, sorry.

so who is misinforming?

who has gaps?

This is typically what is painful, we talk about fusion then we drift on the Pu, alpha particles to finish on the soldiers in Iraq !!!

YES Jonule, it's not good depleted uranium weapons YES Jonule there was release of alpha particles which contaminated GI and premises and YES it is criminal and it is irresponsible on the part of the guys who authorized designing and dropping bombs, but here what we're talking about is not weaponry or geopolitics, it's a new process, in the experimental phase, called FUSION !!!
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 05/11/08, 15:22

Yeah C moa, personally I call this amalgam of ... mental fusion ...
: Mrgreen:
0 x
jonule
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2404
Registration: 15/03/05, 12:11




by jonule » 05/11/08, 15:44

sorry Cmoa we are not talking about fusion but at the base of disinformation on nuclear electricity. for the merger it is a question of keeping the precautionary principle as long as it has not kept its promises.
I hope it would hold them, but so far it's failed, it's not my fault ... I'm talking about clean energy and ecological choice ;-)

for the irradiation of a particle of plutnonium emitting a destructive alpha radiation in the lungs, here is a link for you:
http://users.skynet.be/mauriceandre/

there are other texts for scientific information, constituting AIPRI, which differs from CIPRI: one is independent the other is not.

but if you want to insist on proving that it is stopped by a sheet of paper I leave it to you: I AGREE. : I have no paper in my lungs, sorry! otherwise I could not breathe;
but maybe you will show us yours? : Lol:

I do not understand, the more I put sources of information, the more you look bad, Cmoa, what are you looking for exactly?

you want to contact AVIGOLFE, the association of soldiers from Reims returning from the Gulf War, to verify that I am lying? are we going to do a little report?

you insist on talking about physical equations, I tell you that the physical world in which we live is not a closed system, and that we all breathe the same air, and that the production of fuels, in particular reprocessing, is most sparkling.
just look at the Hague tritum rejects! you make us a small article or it is mine? -)

Cmoa wrote:For your remark regarding inhalation or ingestion of alpha. It is true that it is dangerous and that is why when we work on equipment containing these particles, we use special clothing (MURUROA clothing) to protect workers.

who that "we"?
so, "we" are going to lend outfits to all those who are near power plants and reprocessing plants then, and for groundwater, what do you recommend? ............
are you aware that soldiers who worked in polynesia did not have the suit you are talking about? and that some have been contaminated? Do you want me to tell you about it? you don't seem very aware i think ...


I am not trying to be taken seriously. I give all the leads. radioactivity should not be learned in theory, but in practice, otherwise it is too easy. I don't think you are lying, but I show you as you forget points in your reasoning, and often it is through practice that the difference is made.

I hope I have taught you something, but if I see that you weaken I will be there for you do not worry ;-) knowledge and knowledge must be shared: I too am patient.

Cmoa wrote:If I tell you that the merger does not create long-lived waste, you immediately say that I am having a bad time and you tell me about Pu when there is none in the context of the merger !!!

you mean there is no plutonium used in nuclear power plants? is that what you're trying to say? that there is no utility in the preparation of the fuel and during its reprocessing?

Cmoa wrote:we invented a unit of measurement which is called "the half-life time" it is about the time taken by the particle to lose half of its energy. Thus, Pu has a half-life of 24000 years while radon has a half-life of 30 minutes. The particles emitted by the fusion will probably be close to those of radon !!!

probably ? well you have to prove it! it's still to be seen ...
I know the half-life time very well, and you forget to specify that it is the time to lose half of its dangerousness. for depleted uranium it is 4.5 million years, BUT there is still the other half-life remaining, to completely lose the rest of the radioactivity. I'm curious to see that you omitted it ...
as you specify, this unit of measurement was "invented".
carbon-14 also I know, in particular because of the releases in the environment of the nuclear factories which exceed the authorized limits.



go for the alpha particle that does not cross the paper (as well put all the nuclear factories in paper boxes), I give you the link to the information on the lungs and alpha radiation:
http://users.skynet.be/mauriceandre/

I am happy to see that you recognize the harmful effects of this uranium technology.
I am also glad that you recognize that they are linked to the use of electricity from nuclear power plants.
0 x
jonule
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2404
Registration: 15/03/05, 12:11




by jonule » 05/11/08, 15:59

Cmoa, if you think that this subject is about fusion, then we are going to merge with disinformation: you see I am taking a step towards you.

what do you think of this:



fusion

If fusion appears as a fascinating research subject for a physicist, the fact remains that even within the nuclear environment, some members are convinced that the fusion machine will never reach the stage of economic profitability.

Fusion is not ready to contribute to the energy balance of humanity!

The ITER project and the merger, more generally, is not a clean technology.

During operation, the reactor will use tritium. The entire installation will be contaminated with tritium, whose physicochemical qualities identical to those of hydrogen, cause it to diffuse easily through metals ... thus creating releases into the environment. According to estimates, these releases will be 10 times greater than the total releases of tritium emitted by the 19 German reactors! However, the radio-toxicity of tritium is not without consequences for health - contrary to traditional discourses.

In addition, the neutron flux created during the fusion reaction will give up its energy to the wall by heating it and activating the materials that constitute it, thus generating a production of heavy radioactive elements. If it turns out that the merger creates less long-lived waste, it is nevertheless false to say that it does not create any.

Finally, each year, a portion of the enclosure - including magnetic circuits - will have to be changed due to the rapid wear of its inner wall. This will constitute a large volume of very high activity waste, with a more or less long lifespan.

source:
http://www.greenpeace.org/france/campai ... -nucleaire

are they liars? on what point then?






ah yes without forgetting:

Another product released by power plants is tritium, a radioactive isotope of hydrogen. It is emitted into the air in the form of water vapor, and into the river in the form of radioactive tritiated water. When we breathe this vapor, a large percentage of this tritium is absorbed by the human body. Once inside the body, tritium can cause cancer and genetic mutations. In pregnant women tritium is absorbed by the fetus.

source:
http://www.sortirdunucleaire.ca/sn/

it is directly the water used to cool the power stations that is irradiated, like the whole power station.
why then are the cooling chimneys so high (classic response expected)?
why is real estate so low near power plants?
0 x
jonule
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2404
Registration: 15/03/05, 12:11




by jonule » 05/11/08, 16:16

well, I notice that I get carried away every time you look for lice, Cmoa ... alros we stop there tope there?
no because I think we have already talked about it 100 times!
nevertheless I save this very interesting debate, it allowed to go even further, which opens our eyes.

I believe I have found the origin of our debate:

Cmoa wrote:jonule wrote: "
we will see those who live near nuclear power plants, + many to fill electric vehicles "

Finally an anti nuk which poses the problem of charging electric cars !!!

Will you go so far as to condemn them?


@ +
0 x
C moa
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 704
Registration: 08/08/08, 09:49
Location: Algiers
x 9




by C moa » 05/11/08, 17:49

jonule wrote:I do not understand, the more I put sources of information, the more you look bad, Cmoa, what are you looking for exactly?
it is not the problem that you put new sources it is that you have the bad habit of not putting them at the right time just to drown the fish or you distort them in a caricatural way.

you want to contact AVIGOLFE, the association of soldiers from Reims returning from the Gulf War, to verify that I am lying? are we going to do a little report?
This is the typical example. We are talking about electricity production and you are going towards military applications.

just look at the Hague tritum rejects! you make us a small article or it is mine? -)
Well, I would start the article with "the water released by La Hague is less radioactive than Volvic water or milk. Should we stop drinking volvic or milk ??

I am not trying to be taken seriously.
Foul confessed is half forgiven but if that is it, there is no point in debating. I understand your systematic deviations better
I give all the leads. radioactivity should not be learned in theory, but in practice, otherwise it is too easy. I don't think you are lying, but I show you as you forget points in your thinking, and often it is through practice that the difference is made.
For someone who has never set foot in a power plant, I find these remarks a little surprising : Lol:
Cmoa wrote:If I tell you that the merger does not create long-lived waste, you immediately say that I am having a bad time and you tell me about Pu when there is none in the context of the merger !!!

you mean there is no plutonium used in nuclear power plants? is that what you're trying to say? that there is no utility in the preparation of the fuel and during its reprocessing?
I confirm, there is no plutonium in FUSION nuclear power plants.

for depleted uranium it is 4.5 million years, BUT there is still the other half-life remaining, to completely lose the rest of the radioactivity. I'm curious to see that you omitted it ...
Depleted uranium is a NATURAL material, I'm curious to see that you omitted it ... :D
For the half-life, I thought what I said was enough. What do you want me to add ?? That the decrease is exponential ?? You're still going to blame me for speaking like a physicist ... : Shock:

I am happy to see that you recognize the harmful effects of this uranium technology.
I am also glad that you recognize that they are linked to the use of electricity from nuclear power plants.
I never said that this technology is safe, I never said that there was no link with our electricity consumption. All I am saying is that we see less clearly on the other side of the barbellized and that having worked in this industry, I think that it is generally serious and that a lot of precautions are taken. I know that on this last point we will never agree so let's stay there.

__________________________________________________________
Regarding your friends of greenpeace, I would not say that they are liars but either they are badly informed or they are very bad because:
- the merger is not just Iter and saying that it will never be profitable and that it is not a clean technology is clearly disinformation. The deuterium-lithium fusion is aneutronic, the hydrogen-boron fusion also and does not even produce alpha if I remember correctly (cuicui can complete, he follows this principle very closely). There is also work currently on cold fusion.
- ITER has never been presented as a 100% clean solution and for good reason it does not exist and it will probably never exist !!! On the other hand, it is clear that this technology, if it comes to an end, will be much less problematic and much less polluting than fission.

To get out of nuclear power, what they say is true except that they forget to say that more than 99% of these discharges are in the form of tritiated water (ultimately harmless) and as they are not clear, you immediately interpret that
it is directly the water used to cool the power stations that is irradiated, like the whole power station.
when it has nothing to do with it. Tritium releases are absolutely not done by the cooling circuit.

why is real estate so low near power plants?
For the same reasons that prices are low at the foot of an airport, a refinery, a blast furnace .... It is all the more true that generally you do not have much around a power plant it is no coincidence that EDF had to build cities at the same time as the power plants : Cheesy: . Around oats, bugey, Civaux ... there is nothing apart from fields and marshes.
0 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Media & News: TV shows, reports, books, news ..."

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : Majestic-12 [Bot] and 146 guests