Tricastin Socatri nuclear accident, uranium leak 360kg?

[Leo Maximus]

What is natural uranium (ore)?

The answer is in the text ...

So it would be Yellow Cake?

[jonule]

you caricature chatam as toujorus it's you who are on your little cloud (radioactive)

"the peoples": you are not part of the people, you are part of those who govern them and choose for them by saying "nuclear is good, eat in"? ...
they do not want abundant, it is the manufacturers who force it under the aegis of the purchasing power. cheap yes, and there is more 1 way to replace electricity, the examples are not lacking.

transport with electricity POLLUENT because the production of nuclear electricity is polluting, in all points of view, of the extraction of the ore, the manufacture, the transport, the management of waste, the démentèlements, and of course all the accidents that occur regularly.

> Why don't you mention Biogas, used in eastern countries, it uses methane worse than CO2 for warming.

still a false argument therefore, I easily recognize the game of pro-nuclear basic speech, complaining that passive houses are expensive to buy in the current system.
it's true, but you do not talk about alternative solutions, like straw houses to name a few, friends of mine build them and it cost them 30.000 € in bioclimatic self-construction.

[Chatham]

So it would be Yellow Cake?

The yellow cake is a concentrate of 75% uranium, and there it was apparently water containing residues of ore grinding and not yellow cake.

[Leo Maximus]

So it would be Yellow Cake?

The yellow cake is a concentrate of 75% uranium, and there it was apparently water containing residues of ore grinding and not yellow cake.

Ok, so it's reassuring. The Rhône carries natural uranium that comes from the Alps but it is not worth adding more ...

I am not afraid of nuclear, I am a former DCN (military activities), classified DATR (Directly Affected Works Radiation), I also worked Chinon (at the power plant not in the vineyards ) and of course Tricastin for EDF. What scares me is the proliferation and the non-respect of safety instructions.

[Chatham]

"the peoples": you are not part of the people, you are part of those who govern them and choose for them by saying "nuclear is good, eat in"? ...
they do not want abundant, it is the manufacturers who force it under the aegis of the purchasing power. cheap yes, and there is more 1 way to replace electricity, the examples are not lacking.

transport with electricity POLLUENT because the production of nuclear electricity is polluting, in all points of view, of the extraction of the ore, the manufacture, the transport, the management of waste, the démentèlements, and of course all the accidents that occur regularly.

> Why don't you mention Biogas, used in eastern countries, it uses methane worse than CO2 for warming.

still a false argument therefore, I easily recognize the game of pro-nuclear basic speech, complaining that passive houses are expensive to buy in the current system.
it's true, but you do not talk about alternative solutions, like straw houses to name a few, friends of mine build them and it cost them 30.000 € in bioclimatic self-construction.

I am absolutely not a leader, but a simple employee without the slightest hint of power ... (except possibly when I find a solution to save money, so energy, in a process ...)
Biogas is mainly used in Germany, but it takes heavy investments ... and the French farmers are broke ...
Straw houses at € 30000 make me laugh: if you have the pros do this, you can apply a juicy multiplier coefficient (not everyone has clay within reach, nor a peasant equipped with a old baler and straw in "rab", nor friends working with the eye) .. on a land which costs on average 5x more expensive than the house (except in lost corners which multiply on the other hand the cost of the daily transport) ... especially at a time when straw is lacking as long as we give it to animals to eat or we make bioethanol with ...

[jonule]

no, but what a defeatist it is not possib '!

broke the subsidized peasants? Well it's smart, had to invest differently.
in addition, projects are always possible with europe. and facilities can be minimized and simplified. after that it's politics: because after that it's independence continuously.

for construction it is the price of all-inclusive materials to make the bioclimatic house. in "conventional" parpoaing hollow, it's just the price of materials for a classic house that consumes electricity the rest is the labor and the credit over years ... there it is you who builds the house, ok it takes years but you don't make a loan that ruins you 20 years: it's a choice.
after I understand that this choice you do not do it, I know young people galley not caught in the credit system, well they are OK to take their hands out of their pocket! -)

for assos, all networks are available on the internet, they have literally exploded, we are even starting to find compressed straw panels "s direct!

like what are the defeatists to think that ;-)

[Leo Maximus]

...
- the sale of nuclear reactors, especially to dictators like Mr Gaddafi, endangers the environment and the survival of the planet;
...

Libya, Syria, Iran want nuclear power, for the oil post it seems. After all, why should not they?

Gaddafi, al-Assad, Ahmadinejad do not seem to be very popular people, but is it not better for them to be given nuclear power than to let them develop the technology themselves? We will have at least some control possibilities on the spot. It's a friendly act, and it's probably better for us to be with those people than to have them against us. I think we have learned from the past with the experience of Saddam Hussein and his Osirak reactor.

[Lietseu]

Christophe .... you defend what cause already? the depletion of NRJ fossils on the banner of your site?
you defend that the nuclear does not produce CO2? we talk about it if you want.

I defend common sense and reason and I condemn the deceptive behavior we many anti nuke who are embraced in mental prisons

I fight ALL pollutions, including mental, and their effects. And with the nuke there is a lot of mental pollution (in TWO SENSES I want to clarify it ...). The numbers are there yet: nuclear KILLS MUCH LESS than fossil fuels ... and oil in particular.

[But I'm running away ...

It seems that it is not only the incident of Tricastin, which poses a problem ...
These lively exchanges of words, between Jonule and you, are for me the expression of the deep discomfort experienced by the entire population of this planet, through the experiences of those "we call great".
A little development: "Humans, interested and destructive species, have constantly invented more polluting technologies than ever before without ever worrying about their own future, nor, and that's much more serious, the future of their own descent! No, I have not been looking for this statement in one book or the other, I assume it-it's mine!
I join you both and probably most econologists saying that it is simply high time, that we think about no longer use any polluting technique!
What happened at Tricastin and an international disaster and I weigh my words once again!
I heard that wells (and therefore groundwater) was also polluted in this region since already a good time ... And there one thinks to dream, it is of the military equipment which contaminated this fleet ... This material was thus buried without taking any particular precaution

You see, gentlemen, where am I going?
the reality of the facts is this: we are led by people, who consider that only the money they can earn is important and therefore, will not hesitate to kill father and mother to continue their criminal work .

I suppose that Mother Laborde, in her book "the revelation", teaches us a lot about all these little things that we do not say on the television news so as not to disturb the good people or the populace. I am convinced that our civilization is dying, because it is led by a band of incompetents whose only concern is not to bring you the well-being and happiness that promises you, but to you whistled until the last little euro cents! Make no mistake, there is no politician worth a detour for him! As long as I saw the news on television I was deeply repelled by the light way in which these people speak of a problem which concerns the whole of humanity, as Jonule quite rightly says, we are talking here about pollution that will go last for thousands of years! We are talking about hundreds of thousands of cancer cases that will be spread all over the world because what is happening in France is happening elsewhere in China in the United States in England, in Russia especially! where one does not care much about the value of human life! All these cases of pollution are irreversible cases (we do not yet have decontamination methods that could be applied to hundreds of tons of materials that are fissile in nature) which will therefore threaten several generations of our children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren.
The me I say stop, that's enough!
We are treated like cattle ... The slaughterhouse is not far!

Are we, people of the Earth, going to continue to let ourselves be eaten by crazy people?

Let's meditate the question carefully, otherwise there is a good chance that there will not be any after, and I think we'll all agree!

And do not tell me that I am dramatizing, I notice

[Leo Maximus]

After the accident, Areva officials cynically declared: "There will be no consequences for the environment", and finally: "the Tricastin accident is closed".

The vines are cultivated in this region and this "inconsequential" incident put in difficulty the winegrowers of the region like those of the "Coteaux du Tricastin". When you go to see the shelves at the end of the day at Leclerc, Intermarché, Carouffe, the "Coteaux du Tricastin" there are plenty, the appellation is no longer sold. It's over.

[minguinhirigue]

Chatam, I agree that the "ecologists", of which I belong, have dreams which can be expensive. But expensive individually it requires less costs to the community therefore less taxes and can be paid jobs at a fairer value ...

The dogma of the protective and financial state and very strong in France, it has good, it must be recognized, it has bad, it must be improved

Thus, I think that the systematic centralization of energy production or the permanent centralization that the politicians want for economies of scale goes against common sense.
In spite of any sense of the human, in break with effective local and distributed management (even if more complex to grasp overall), the notion of Progress leads us all to a frantic race towards who knows what by taking inconsiderate risks systematically. Not that it should not take, but can be a little more mastered than with our atoms ...

So yes, renewable energy is expensive for investment, but overall the sectors seem more respectful of this planet on which we live. Yes they are expensive to purchase individually, but if they avoid the construction of nuclear power plants and they are produced masses, the prices will go down (the house at 400 000 € is a proto with particularly expensive materials, if savings of scales are realized, must be able to divide the price to 300 see 200 000 €). On the other hand, is it because we have a cheap price for shit that the price must be the same for something good? Let's stop the planned obsolescence of barracks, a house is supposed to hold 100 years, not 15 like Borloo houses!

Moreover, if we talk about partial autonomy, mutual help, and sharing small collective, make his home is not so complicated, and then exceed 100 000 € even for a passive house, it becomes really difficult: straw houses with an 6 R return to 70 000 € with sober finishes mounted in collectives. The workforce just needs to be nurtured, housed, laughed and shared, and she will call you to assemble her!

But partial autonomy when one swears by the subsidies of Sarko dad to Areva, or solarmagic, it is not always what is sought.

PS: I do not want to Borlo, he has at least launched a sword (... in the water?). As for these investigations on nuclear sites ...