Slovenia under fire for misreporting nuclear plant shutdown

[bananas]

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jBslYFOTWiwfDjHLKtfUoJeLiviQ

Slovenia under fire for misreporting nuclear plant shutdown

2 days ago

LJUBLJANA, Slovenia (AFP) — Slovenia was caught in a nuclear controversy Thursday after admitting that it wrongly told other countries that a water leak that forced it to shut down a nuclear reactor was only an exercise.

The shutdown on Wednesday led to the EU raising a Europe-wide radiation alert for the first time since the system was put in place in the aftermath of the Chernobyl disaster 22 years ago.

After detecting a loss in the reactor's cooling system mid-afternoon Wednesday, Slovenian authorities decided to manually shut the plant down, and correctly alerted the European Commission -- but erroneously told neighbouring countries the incident was an exercise.

<snip>

Austrian Environment Minister Josef Proell, whose country is deeply opposed to nuclear power, said: "It's not okay to set off an alarm in Europe and inform Austria, Italy and Hungary that it's only an exercise," he said.

<snip>

[Dogmudgeon]

1. Any word on how much radiation was released?

Injuries to the plant employees?

Local people?

Mortality/Morbidity reports?

I imagine it wasn't very big -- they plan to re-start the reactor within three to five days.

These things are really poorly reported from the perspective of both sides of the issue. They make a big deal of reactor problems, but release almost no information, and then it takes over a week before the international press corps (which has become nearly as bad as the US press corps) tells anybody what happened. You'd think they were reporting the number of sprinkles that fall off the donuts in their most popular pastry shops.

C'mon ... the International Stand-Up Comedians' Union couldn't be THAT desperate for "glow-in-the-dark" gags.

--p!

[losthills]

12. Nuclear power is "intermitant............"

But when it's working "properly" it releases radiation "24/7........"

[NNadir]

2. Of course, nobody reports dangerous fossil fuel "leaks" which actually kill people.

There is NOT ONE fundie anti-nuke who gives a rat's ass about any reporting of dangerous fossil fuel waste dumping directly into the atmosphere.

Basically fundies position consists entirely of selective attention. Nuclear power plants in this highly dubious immoral position need never leak or operate even remotely imperfectly - even if no lives are lost and no injuries are incurred, while the fundies ignore the fact that the dangerous lethal fossil fuel plants can never operate safely under any conditions.

As for the dumb ass fundie anti-nuke Austrians, I note that there is a Czech movement called Start Zwentendorf that notes that Austrians do nothing to keep dangerous fossil fuel waste that they generate within their borders.

Closed Zwentendorf is dangerous.

Austria imports about 20 TWh of electricity per year. Czech Republic, the only net exporter of electricity in middle Europe, is and will be the supplier. Production of electricity in Czech thermal power plants results, besides the radioactive emissions mentioned above, in the following dangerous emissions:

solid particles, which cause lung cancer and other severe illnesses
heavy metals, which are the cause of severe illnesses
sulfur dioxide, which causes acid rains and damages health
carbon dioxide, which is the most important greenhouse gas which cause global climate changes
oxides of nitrogen, which cause smog and contribute to global climate changes

I have written on this movement in a diary on another website, bemoaning fundie selective attention which has resulted in many fatalities in central Europe: Czech Grassroots Movement Starts Mud Wrestling With Austrian Grassroots Movement Over Nuclear Power

Welcome to 400 ppm of carbon dioxide fundie.

Heckuva job. Heckuva job.

[Ghost Dog]

3. Yup.

:thumbsup: NNadir

6 June 2008
Towards an Energy Revolution - IEA launches Energy Technology Perspectives 2008 in Japan
Read press release...
Access fact sheets…
See presentation…
Link to special ETP page…
/... http://www.iea.org/

[diane in sf]

4. They anounce them around here--Tesco and other refineries in the east bay have bad leaks regularly.

[NNadir]

5. Really? Are fundies calling for banning dangerous fossil fuels?

From what I can tell, there are ZERO anti-nuke fundies who give a rat's ass about dangerous fossil fuel leaks, dangerous fossil fuel waste, dangerous fossil fuel weapons diversion, dangerous fossil fuel terrorism, dangerous fossil fuel accidents or dangerous fossil fuel depletion.

I have yet to see ONE anti-nuke fundie report one of these things in an effort to ban dangerous fossil fuels.

NOT ONE.

I, on the other hand, have called for banning dangerous fossil fuels thousands of times.

[kristopher]

6. That's the dumbest argument in a vast array of dumb arguments

That's the dumbest argument in a vast array of dumb arguments; I mean, really, you type more idiocy than anyone I've ever seen outside of southern baptist revival tent meeting. You totally fail to make even one cogent argument. In fact, it is something I don't think you could do if your life depended on it. All you have are three basic modes: insults, false logic, and plain old fashioned false statements.

Most of the people I know who support renewable development are, in fact, for halting the use of fossil fuels. And judging by where the money for new installed capacity is flowing (solar and wind) and not flowing (coal and nuclear), I'd say our methods and planning are much more effective than yours.

[NNadir]

7. Bullshit. If "most people" supporting so called "renewable energy" were for

banning fossil fuels, they would not be against nuclear power.

Who is working to destroy nuclear infrastructure in Germany?

The coal industry?

No, it is the fundie "renewables will save us" industry, which is in fantasy land.

Nuclear power is, and has been for more than 3 decades, the world's largest source of climate change gas free primary energy.

The "renewable energy will save us" game is denial, and nothing more.

The number of dangerous fossil fuel plants that have been shut because of renewable energy is ZERO.

Welcome to 400 ppm of dangerous fossil fuel in the atmosphere fundie. Heckuva job.

[kristopher]

8. Like I said, three modes.

Case in point - false logic: "If "most people" supporting so called "renewable energy" were for banning fossil fuels, they would not be against nuclear power."

This is a false dichotomy where you present only two alternatives where, in reality, other alternatives exist. In fact, people can be and are committed to banning fossil fuels while simultaneously opposing the widespread deployment of nuclear reactors. These ARE NOT mutually exclusive beliefs.


"No, it is the fundie "renewables will save us" industry, which is in fantasy land.
Nuclear power is, and has been for more than 3 decades, the world's largest source of climate change gas free primary energy.
The "renewable energy will save us" game is denial, and nothing more.
The number of dangerous fossil fuel plants that have been shut because of renewable energy is ZERO."

This is an example of (among other things) an irrelevant conclusion. The discussion is "how do we rebuild our our energy infrastructure?" While forming your response to that question, you are dismissing the totality of the evidence, such as historic rates of growth, different government policy commitments to the relevant technologies, and different economic obstacles. Ignoring current trends and technologies, you cherry pick past results of those factors to make the assertion that renewables cannot supplant fossil fuels. Simply put, your evidence does not support, or even relate to, your conclusion.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[kristopher]

10. You are proof of concept

Data without proper analysis is meaningless.

[skids]

11. But you simply must understand...

...the only way out of this is for us to bike to our new jobs mining uranium. By hand, because we don't like those nasty Li-ion batteries and we don't have long enough extension cords. Also, at night, when we have lots of unused baseload power to spare for those things we simply have to run off electricity.

Except for the highly skilled fission technicians. They get to drive from reactor to reactor in cars (a necessary evil for people that are that important) fueled with dimethyl ether. We'd use DME for the mining, too, but you know fuel synthesis plants take a lot of time to build.

And remember, don't do anything other than go to work, come home, and eat. Those externalities cost precious joules. Exajoules, in fact, over time.



(snark aside, sometimes I wish the Bussard Polywell was five years ahead of current development not because it would fix things up pretty good aside from the social empowerment issue with centralization of ownership, but just so everyone could have a solution that was new enough not to carry decades of PR concern-troll baggage that gets thrown at all existing technologies by the fossil folks.)

[losthills]

13. Hello! Most people supporting renewable energy ARE

for banning fossil fuels.

Take two rat's asses and go to bed. Your work here is finished.....