Lost Password :: Posting Pictures :: Who's Online :: Stats :: Memberlist :: Top Posters :: Search
:: :: Fukushima versus gold mining
Unsubscribe From Newsletter



Welcome, Register :: Log In Welcome to our newest member, Agent67.
Users active in this forum:
Users active in this thread: Guest

1 people online in the last 1 minutes - 0 members, 0 anon and 1 guests. (Most ever was 29 at 13:36:32 Sat Aug 3 2002)

Pages: [ 1 ]

[ Notify of replies made to this post ][ Print ][ Send To Friend ] [ Watch ] [ < ] [ Add Reply ] [ > ]

cubsqueal
18:50:27 Thu
Dec 12 2013

Offline
365 posts

Reply
Fukushima versus gold mining

I am really intrigued by this article. Purported 95% chance of the deciding earthquake. Kind of hard to contemplate all the ramifications of these events.

http://www.storyleak.com/top-scientist-another-fukushima-quake-mean-us-evacuation/

  
overtheedge
19:34:11 Thu
Dec 12 2013

Offline
600 posts
Reply
Re: Fukushima versus gold mining

The article is nonsense.

Here is a link to the fuel rod composition of the Fukushima-Daiichi power plant.

http://www.oecd-nea.org/sfcompo/Ver.2/Eng/Fukushima-Daiichi-3/index.html

As you can plainly see, there is virtually zero chance of an uncontrolled fission reaction by bumping two rods together. Were it otherwise, why didn't the plant experience a nuclear explosion when it melted down?

Does the site need a thorough clean-up? Yep, but keep in mind that many people have already moved back into the exclusion zone. They are not dying like flies.

Always remember that there is a substantial difference between a practicing scientist and an award-winning made for TV science educator. For a science educator to remain employed, they must follow the professional wrestling paradigm; the audience has gotta love you or hate you, they just can't be ambivalent towards you.

So the 95% probability of another major quake in the Fukushima area within the next three years is suspect as well. Fear mongering always gets substantial press coverage. So if the quake doesn't happen, it can be claimed that we luckily dodged the bullet.

eric

  
rabbitt46
19:43:12 Thu
Dec 12 2013

Offline
posts
Reply
Re: Fukushima versus gold mining

And so the merrygoround keeps going around. :thinking:

  
geowizard
20:33:01 Thu
Dec 12 2013

Offline
posts
Reply
Re: Fukushima versus gold mining

Ote,

Have the Japanese stopped fishing offshore?

If not, there probably are fish that contain radioactive materials from the last earthquake.

Albacore tuna are migratory fish.

(stick with me a second)...

If we capture radioactive Albacore and extract the oil, we would have potentially captured a triple energy source.

Distillation of the fish oil would separate the hydrogen. The contained hydrogen represents a fuel.

The fish oil could be used directly as a fuel.

Finally, the byproduct carbon with radioactive plutonium could be used as a fissionable fuel in a nuclear powered Bobcat.

The tuna can be canned packed in water and marketed through Costco.

Just an idea... :smile:

- Geowizard

  
baub
14:51:54 Fri
Dec 13 2013

Offline
915 posts
Reply
Re: Fukushima versus gold mining

Unassailable logic Geo!

b

  
leonard
22:46:58 Fri
Dec 13 2013

Offline
410 posts

Reply
Re: Fukushima versus gold mining

We never used any fish when we made warheads at Rocky Flats.
Leonard
[1 edits; Last edit by leonard at 22:48:02 Fri Dec 13 2013]

  

Pages: [ 1 ]

[ Notify of replies made to this post ][ Print ][ Send To Friend ] [ Watch ] [ < ] [ Add Reply ] [ > ]

 Total Members: 11956

  • Can start a new thread. (Everyone)
  • Can't start a new poll. (Mods & Admins)
  • Can add a reply. (Everyone)
  • Can't edit your posts.(Everyone Registered)
  • Register :: Log In :: Administrators

    The time is now 08:02:08 Sat Nov 27 2021

    Powered By BbBoard V1.4.2
    © 2001-2007 BbBoy.net
    :: :: Fukushima versus gold mining

    [Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]

    [Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]