--- MacKennel 2.2.1
* Origin: The Quarry: 860-889-6427 -- Amateur Radio & Mac User (1:320/301.0)
Ä [19] SFFAN (2:463/2.5) ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ SFFAN Ä
Msg : 74 of 225
From : Chip Griffin 1:320/301 .îí 08 .íâ 96 14:06
To : David Durgee
Subj : Re: nuclear
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
On 01/08/96 (@14:04:55) David Durgee typed:
DD> You should seriously check out a few books such as "The Health Hazards of
DD> NOT Going Nuclear" and a few others available at your local library. What
DD> this country needs is more nukes and fewer kooks.
Thank you, you have restored my faith in the sanity of people in general! You
are exactly correct. The biggest problem with nuclear power in this country
is the ignorance of the average American when it comes to the dangers etc of
nuclear power.
de Chip [N1MIE] President of TRAUG quarry@q.continuum.net
--- MacKennel 2.2.1
* Origin: The Quarry: 860-889-6427 -- Amateur Radio & Mac User (1:320/301.0)
Ä [19] SFFAN (2:463/2.5) ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ SFFAN Ä
Msg : 75 of 225
From : Chip Griffin 1:320/301 .îí 08 .íâ 96 14:07
To : Chris Baugh
Subj : Re: NUCLEAR paradox?
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
On 01/08/96 (@14:07:05) Chris Baugh typed:
CG> You got it backwards. Fusion requires such high temperatures that it
CG> must use magnetic containment and the like ... It is MUCH LESS safe
CG> then fusion.
CB> Fusion is much less safe than fusion?
Ooops. Fusion is MUCH less safe than FISSION (at least with what we know
today).
de Chip [N1MIE] President of TRAUG quarry@q.continuum.net
--- MacKennel 2.2.1
* Origin: The Quarry: 860-889-6427 -- Amateur Radio & Mac User (1:320/301.0)
Ä [19] SFFAN (2:463/2.5) ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ SFFAN Ä
Msg : 76 of 225
From : Chip Griffin 1:320/301 .îí 08 .íâ 96 14:09
To : Owen E. Oulton
Subj : Re: nuclear
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
On 01/08/96 (@14:08:43) Owen E. Oulton typed:
OO> constant winds, et cetera. Hydro and nuclear have their place, as well.
Which is basically anywhere you need a lot of power with the smallest
investment of resources (including land) ... this seems most prevalent near
big cities.
de Chip [N1MIE] President of TRAUG quarry@q.continuum.net
--- MacKennel 2.2.1
* Origin: The Quarry: 860-889-6427 -- Amateur Radio & Mac User (1:320/301.0)
Ä [19] SFFAN (2:463/2.5) ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ SFFAN Ä
Msg : 77 of 225
From : Chip Griffin 1:320/301 .îí 08 .íâ 96 14:21
To : Ecarey
Subj : Re: NUCLEAR
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
On 01/08/96 (@14:16:36) Ecarey typed:
Ec> 1)They have lousy p.r. They are clueless when it comes to the task of
Ec> conveying the real benefits, safety- and environment-wise, of nuclear
Ec> power, and they are so arrogant they don't understand why they should have
Ec> to.
This is exactly what I have said. As an employee, and a believer, in this
field I have often said that they need a PR blitz like the dairy industry and
the beef council. The industry should strive to educate the population. Only
then will we have a chance.
Ec> 3)The nuclear waste problem, which is far more of a problem than some on
Ec> this echo are willing to concede. It's solvable, but only if the nuclear
Ec> industry first solves problem #1, their p.r. incompetance and their
Ec> arrogance, and actually _address_ the waste problem.
Yeah, with events like the recent movement of an old core by Knolls Atomic
Power group (in Windsor Locks CT) through the state with little or no notice
took everyone by surprise. It was interesting to listen to the "bad press" on
the TV. The characterized the spent fuel in a hermetically sealed (welded
shut) steel cask as extremely dangerous. They all but directly stated that it
was highly irresponsible of the company to move it without prior notification
(which they aren't required by federal and state regulations).
The other reason, it seems to me, for the general fear of nuclear power is the
mistake of associating it in any way, shape, or form with nuclear bombs. Very
silly, but very common.
de Chip [N1MIE] President of TRAUG quarry@q.continuum.net
--- MacKennel 2.2.1
* Origin: The Quarry: 860-889-6427 -- Amateur Radio & Mac User (1:320/301.0)
Ä [19] SFFAN (2:463/2.5) ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ SFFAN Ä
Msg : 78 of 225
From : Chip Griffin 1:320/301 .îí 08 .íâ 96 14:23
To : Todd Sullivan
Subj : Re: nuclear
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
On 01/08/96 (@14:22:26) Todd Sullivan typed:
TS> We have nuclear *now*. What we need is education and dispelling of
TS> mythical/apocalyptic mis/disinformation. Without an informed populace, the
TS> "no nukes" crowd will have their say, as will those who think solar is
TS> science fiction. They will until oil/gas/coal are prohibitively expensive
TS> and in short supply.
True. And, by the way, it is good to have someone watching to ensure you are
keeping honest. It is not impossible for an unwatched child to sneak into the
cookie jar (take the US congress for example) ... but ignorance IS fear and so
education is the solution!
de Chip [N1MIE] President of TRAUG quarry@q.continuum.net
--- MacKennel 2.2.1
* Origin: The Quarry: 860-889-6427 -- Amateur Radio & Mac User (1:320/301.0)
Ä [19] SFFAN (2:463/2.5) ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ SFFAN Ä
Msg : 79 of 225
From : Chip Griffin 1:320/301 .îí 08 .íâ 96 14:33
To : Bianca Wesslak
Subj : Re: nuclear BS
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
On 01/08/96 (@14:24:56) Mark Jones typed:
BW> Maybe the core never hit air but the three mile Island explosian
BW> is a good example of how dangerous nuclear energy is. Three mile
BW> Island is still being cleaned out by robots due to the dangerous
BW> radiation. Lead is the only shield that I know of that can
BW> withstand radiation, that and cockroaches. As for the success of
BW> the navy subs, I won't say anything on them due to no knowledge,
BW> but I'd hate to see one get blown up.
Lead is not the only shielding material. Nearly anything can be a shield.
Everything has a "tenth-thickness", that is to say a thickness which will
reduce the radiation field strength by 1/10th of its original strength. Air
can even be a shield (especially for Alpha radiation, which even a sheet of
paper can completely eliminate).
Their are four types of radiation:
Alpha, Beta, Gamma, and Neutron.
Alpha is a 2-He-4++, note it is strongly charged and fairly large. Those two
factors are the biggest reason for two characteristics (1) it does a LOT of
damage if interacting with viceral mass (tissue) and (2) it can be shielded by
small amounts of almost any material.
Beta is essentially a free electron (e-). It is also charged, but less than
an Alpha. It can be stopped by glasses, water, skin, thin metal (some)
sheets. The biggest danger of Beta radiation is to the eyes, but eye glasses
(plastic or glass) will almost totally eliminate it.
Gamma is a particle wave similar to light (but higher energy and different
wave length). Your microwave emits these to cook your food. Water will
shield this in enough quantities. It is a threat to your whole body (ie it
may go through a substantial part of the body before causing damage). We use
the principles of time,distance, and shielding for this one. Minimize the
time, maximize the distance, maximize the shielding to reduce exposure.
Neutron is the biggest fear. It can effect the whole body, isn't easily
shielded (water in enough quantity, lead or other dense metals), and can
travel long distances causing lots of damage as it goes. Fortunately it is
the least common form of radiation. We design or reactors such that it is
only present at power (ie only when it is making electricity) and shield it
such that there is almost none of it outside of containment (and generally no
one goes there at power).
Think about it ... ask questions ...
de Chip [N1MIE] President of TRAUG quarry@q.continuum.net
--- MacKennel 2.2.1
* Origin: The Quarry: 860-889-6427 -- Amateur Radio & Mac User (1:320/301.0)
Ä [19] SFFAN (2:463/2.5) ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ SFFAN Ä
Msg : 80 of 225
From : Chip Griffin 1:320/301 .îí 08 .íâ 96 14:38
To : Brion Lienhart
Subj : Re: nuclear BS
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
On 01/08/96 (@14:37:40) Brion Lienhart typed:
BL> and type of radiation. IIRC, for lead and gamma radiation it's 4 inches.
BL> I.E. if you stick 4" of lead between you and some radiation if you have 100
BL> rem on the unshielded side, you'll only have 10 rem on the other side, 8"
BL> and you'll only have 1 rem.
I seem to recall it is 2" for lead. Water was 10" I think.
de Chip [N1MIE] President of TRAUG quarry@q.continuum.net
--- MacKennel 2.2.1
* Origin: The Quarry: 860-889-6427 -- Amateur Radio & Mac User (1:320/301.0)
Ä [19] SFFAN (2:463/2.5) ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ SFFAN Ä
Msg : 81 of 225
From : Chip Griffin 1:320/301 .îí 08 .íâ 96 14:42
To : The Raven
Subj : Re: nuclear BS
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
On 01/08/96 (@14:38:44) The Raven typed:
BW> Maybe the core never hit air but the three mile Island explosian is a
BW> good example of how dangerous nuclear energy is.
TR> Explosion? There was *no* explosion. I am quite serious when I say
TR> that the total amount of radiation released was miniscule, I *meant* it.
TR> You'd get a bigger dose of radiation from just sitting in the US Capital
TR> Building. Funny how you never answered this point. Look, it's really
TR> very simple. Reactor cores don't explode. Period. They can have a
TR> catastrophic meltdown, they can have radioactive coolant leaks, but they do
TR> not go up in a cascade of nuclear fire a'la a nuclear bomb. They *can't*.
Actually I can think of one example where you are wrong, and there aren't many
people who will even know what I am talking about. There was a plant, SL-1,
the US.Army was learning on in the early days (~1950s or 60s I think). They
were doing some maintenance on Christmas eve (or about that time of year) in
Idaho when something went wrong. They pulled the rods (done manually in those
days) too fast or something and had a "steam explosion". All this means is
that they were creating so much power so fast that the water nearly
instantaneously boiled in one area of the reactor. The rods were ejected, all
errr both the technicians were killed by the explosion (one impaled into the
ceiling - took them a while to discover the body, no one thought to look up),
and the supervisor was killed by the radiation when he came to see what was
going on. They dismantled the whole thing and burried it under concrete out
there ...
de Chip [N1MIE] President of TRAUG quarry@q.continuum.net
--- MacKennel 2.2.1
* Origin: The Quarry: 860-889-6427 -- Amateur Radio & Mac User (1:320/301.0)
Ä [19] SFFAN (2:463/2.5) ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ SFFAN Ä
Msg : 82 of 225
From : Chip Griffin 1:320/301 .îí 08 .íâ 96 14:49
