OT: Fracking banned in NY State

[zap]

Originally Posted by oldpotatoe

Not trying to start an argument BUT a lot of fracking=oil but also natural gas..mostly for electricity.

Yes a nuclear accident is a BIG deal but design them well(not like Chernobyl) and don't build them next to a place where the possibility of an earthquake or Tsunami is high(Japan). Also remember 3 mile Island was in 1979(35 years ago-design has 'improved'..next recycle the waste(like France), control the plutonium.

The USN has been using nuclear power since the 50s, have never had a big accident. Crewmembers sailing on those ships and boats don't have high incidences of nuclear energy caused illness and death...etc. All built by the lowest bidder.

Far cleaner than coal, fracking for NG or petroleum. Both the drilling for and the extraction of. Besides, if the global community decides that electric powered vehicles is the 'future', there had better be a very large increase in electric power generation capacity. If it were to be fuel cells, well, there had better be a way to make a bunch of hydrogen(lots of electricity required)..like with Nukes..

I'd rather have a modern nuclear power plant close to me than a fracking well or coal field.

It will be interesting to see Germany 25 years from now. Merkel wants to eliminate nuclear power and communities don't want massive transmission lines (from north sea wind farms) going through their villages. So what will it be……expanding the use of coal plants?

[goonster]

Originally Posted by oldpotatoe

3 mile Island was in 1979(35 years ago-design has 'improved'.

IMHO, the scenario resulting in the TMI accident has not been rendered obsolete by advances in technology. The format has changed (screens and integrated circuits have replaced gauges and relays), but greater complexity has created new blind spots.

Here is an excellent article linking a topic near and dear to my heart (automated control systems) to a subject you may able to relate to (aviation). The central condundrum discussed here (that highly complex control systems reduce the total number of errors, but reduce our ability to respond to problems that fall outside certain parameters) certainly applies to something like a nuclear power plant.

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by zap

It will be interesting to see Germany 25 years from now. Merkel wants to eliminate nuclear power and communities don't want massive transmission lines (from north sea wind farms) going through their villages. So what will it be……expanding the use of coal plants?

Better hope for sunny, windy days and have somebody come up with a viable power storage system, when it's dark and the wind isn't blowing.

Pocket cold fusion plants.

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by goonster

IMHO, the scenario resulting in the TMI accident has not been rendered obsolete by advances in technology. The format has changed (screens and integrated circuits have replaced gauges and relays), but greater complexity has created new blind spots.

Here is an excellent article linking a topic near and dear to my heart (automated control systems) to a subject you may able to relate to (aviation). The central condundrum discussed here (that highly complex control systems reduce the total number of errors, but reduce our ability to respond to problems that fall outside certain parameters) certainly applies to something like a nuclear power plant.

Not a Nuke, but gotta disagree. Plus, there are many commercial US nuclear power plants operating then and now, and there has been, one, accident in the US.

How many coal plant disasters? Coal mine accidents? How many have died from air and water pollution caused by conventional power plants?

How many major nuclear accidents have there been in the USN?

Worldwide there has really been only 3 major nuclear accidents from the very beginning and 2 were crappy design. Is there a risk? Sure but stepping back and looking at benefit vs risk, I'd say nukes are a great alternative. But because of the 3 very well known accidents, people are wary.

[fuzzalow]

U.S. Maps Pinpoint Earthquakes Linked to Quest for Oil and Gas

Bringing up an older thread discussion with the release of new news.

For all the talk that had gone on before in this thread, there was little talk about what the fracking operations did with the waste water. I didn't know. Well, now we know a little more.

Disposal wells.

That water & sludge mix must make a great geologic lubricant. It will admittedly be difficult to dispel the rumbling ground beneath feet, hearth & home after the fracking operations have extracted their profits and moved elsewhere.

Again, this post not made to further an anti-domestic energy agenda. But there is no such thing as a free lunch. The fracking guys move on but people live where the ground beneath them was turned into a waste dump. How does this get cleaned up? Who pays for this?

[gdw]

Add this book to your reading list before accepting the findings of the USGS. http://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Maps-2.../dp/0226534219

"One new chapter examines the role of national interest and cultural values in national mapping organizations, including the United States Geological Survey"

[fuzzalow]

Originally Posted by gdw

Add this book to your reading list before accepting the findings of the USGS. http://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Maps-2.../dp/0226534219

Your response is completely open ended to me, what are you trying to say? Other than suggest some form of nihilism in the data and facts I use to form inferences in living a life.

I'm not sure a building falling down on somebody's head from an earthquake in Oklahoma has anything to do with premeditated distortions in cartography.

[gdw]

My point is simple, often times the people working at agencies such as the USGS have agendas and reports such as this one should be viewed with healthy skepticism.

[fuzzalow]

Originally Posted by gdw

My point is simple, often times the people working at agencies such as the USGS have agendas and reports such as this one should be viewed with healthy skepticism.

Ah! OK, gotcha. So it is not nihilism that you're suggesting per se but a merely simple conspiracy.

I am just joshing with you gdw, I'm not some crazed anti-something running around with my hair on fire because I have a scintilla of data to base my beliefs on. Kinda like how the anti-nukes & coal industry made mileage with Three Mile Island while completely ignoring the country of France. More facts will surface and we shall see.

What happens in Bakken Field stays in Bakken Field.

[mg2ride]

Originally Posted by fuzzalow

IDo you think even on an intuitive level that a layman cannot understand risk associated at a level of industrial production and consequence for error inherent to this level of throughput?.

History (or hysteria) has shown this to be true time and time again.

[mg2ride]

Originally Posted by TMB

.And in this thread i see much of that which caused me to leave this place in the first instance.

Unbelievable..

What is unbelievable is how many times you have posted that you don't post here anymore.

This is at least the 5th time I recall but likely many more since I don't post here anymore either.

[rnhood]

People die behind the wheels of automobiles, and we deal with it. We keep improving the safely of cars and our highways. We don't stop making cars and run off and hide. Its not the American way. Same for by-products of fracking, we will deal with it. The train must come through - its the American way.

[Louis]

Originally Posted by gdw

My point is simple, often times the people working at agencies such as the USGS have agendas and reports such as this one should be viewed with healthy skepticism.

Tell that to the people who's lives have been shaken by this on a regular basis.

If you have real data to disprove the science let's hear it. Otherwise, saying that you don't believe the other side isn't very convincing.

[gdw]

"If you have real data to disprove the science let's hear it. Otherwise, saying that you don't believe the other side isn't very convincing."

Easy big guy. I haven't taken a side here. The report could be accurate or it could be influenced by the other factors. Do you accept everything you read at face value?

[Steelman]

You want real science? Too lazy, but can offer this:

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/be...cret-agent-can