O/T: Nuclear Reactor Problems

Page 15 of 16  
On 3/17/2011 11:54 AM, Tim W wrote:

From December 13, 2007 Scientific American article, "Coal Ash Is More Radioactive than Nuclear Waste",
... the waste produced by coal plants is actually more radioactive than that generated by their nuclear counterparts. In fact, the fly ash emitted by a power planta by-product from burning coal for electricitycarries into the surrounding environment 100 times more radiation than a nuclear power plant producing the same amount of energy. ... The chances of experiencing adverse health effects from radiation are slim for both nuclear and coal-fired power plantsthey're just somewhat higher for the coal ones. "You're talking about one chance in a billion for nuclear power plants," Christensen says. "And it's one in 10 million to one in a hundred million for coal plants." ... As a general clarification, ounce for ounce, coal ash released from a power plant delivers more radiation than nuclear waste shielded via water or dry cask storage.
The whole article can be read at http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 3/18/2011 4:06 AM, Just Wondering wrote:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste
It is like the double flush toilet, they feel good when they install a low volume toilet, even though the lack of flow requires you to flush it twice using more water than the old ones.
I wonder if we could increase the volume of facts to flush the nonsense about the nuclear power plants down the drain with the other stuff.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Just what are you trying to flush down your toilet that it takes two flushes? ;~) I was skeptical about the double flush from what I had heard about until we moved into our new home in December. So far 1 flush is all that has been necessary althought I was on edge for no reason a time or two.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Leon wrote:

You shouldn't have been worried. With a low-flow toilet, there is no chance of overflow during a blockage.
Unless you flush twice...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

...and don't use MIL's cheese-cake recipe....
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Actually there has been no problem with a single flush, even with the sizeable loads. ;~)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

New homes are designed to be one-flush with low-flow toilets. 3" waste lines and rat's nest plumbing are no longer used. OTOH, retrofitting a low-flow toilet into an older home can be a problem. We don't have a problems (well, not much[*]) with our new home, either, but I know a lot of people with older homes that do.
[*] They don't seem to stay as clean as the older toilets.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 3/19/2011 9:01 AM, snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:

My house was built in 1973. I have replaced two of its three toilets with low flow toilets. The new ones work better than the old high flow toilet.
The only problem that I had was that some idiot plumber could not mount the flange at the proper height or level to the floor. My guess is that the plumbing that is below the floor is probably even worse.
I used a basic Kohler model toilet.
http://www.homedepot.com/Bath-Toilets-One-Two-Piece-Toilets/KOHLER/h_d1/N-5yc1vZarj3Z1qh/R-202409236/h_d2/ProductDisplay?langId=-1&storeId051&catalogId053
Dan
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Because you had no problems doesn't mean that there are no problems.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Still, can you say that you have never had a problem with a high volume toilet?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

He never had a big enough shit.
:)
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I have more with the low flow, certainly. The one problem that I don't have, as has been noted here, is the overflow problem.
That said, I really don't have that much of an issue with them in *NEW* construction. Demanding that they be retrofitted to existing construction is dumb. The federal government in my bathroom is a real problem.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Just Wondering" wrote in message

Low by whose standards? The mercury accumulating in our food chain is not exactly healthy stuff, and one in six American babies has been exposed to dangerous levels of mercury in utero.

Until there is an accident, then the nuke plant catches up, including the ones the Navy has had a few little accidents with resulting in things like contaminated water being released into harbors. The Navy took one of its early and unsuccessful submarine reactors, encased it in stainless steel, and sunk it in the ocean. They went looking for it years later, couldn't find it.
And then there is the issue of what to do with the spent fuel....
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Even your granite counter tops emit radiation but as far as releasing radiation from the oil fired plants your statement is not true when compared to 3 mile island, Chernoble and or the Japan facility and that is the problem.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I believe they would prefer that than a scenario like Japan has right now.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Prefer which, the hysteria over radiation or the actual losses from the earthquake AND the tsunami?
-- A paranoid is someone who knows a little of what's going on. -- William S. Burroughs
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Wait and see what happens from the fall out and the hysteria from fall out that is going to happen.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

IF that happens. Don't count your chickens...
-- A paranoid is someone who knows a little of what's going on. -- William S. Burroughs
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 2011-03-17 11:01:13 -0400, Larry Jaques
A paranoid is someone who knows a little of what's going on. -- William S. Burroughs
More than a little truth there!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Leon" wrote:

Poor baby, miss taking your analitis meds today?
Lew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.