Relax, it's just satire: "Pour un monde nucléaire"

[Dogmudgeon]

It's a satire of an ad that Areva produced.

http://www.dailymotion.com/relevance/search/areva/video/xk25d_un-monde-nucleaire_ads">Pour un monde nucléaire.

It's funny. Trust me on this.

1. Radioactive material is stored in the open and emits green-yellow gas.

2. Trucks ("lorries" in the Commonwealth) carrying radioactive material are driven recklessly. More green-yellow gas is given off.

3. Used nuclear fuel is dumped in an open construction sites shrouded with -- wait for it -- green-yellow fog.

4. Radiation will mess up one's chromosomes and your cute athletic French girlfriend will grow two extra arms, just like her Maman did after taking LSD. (And this is an anti-nuclear satire?)

5. Gemini Titan II launch vehicles are used to carry nuclear warheads, which are typically launched from residential upper-middle-class banliuex like the one where your cute athletic French girlfriend with two extra arms lives. One such Gemini-tipped Titan II missile was used to bomb Hiroshima.

6. Aircraft are commonly flown into nuclear reactors, just like could have happened on 9-11. (Mr. Cheney said so himself.)

Srsly.

Kthxbai.

Now. how 'bout a big terrorist fist jab for some Democratic solidarity?

--p!

[kristopher]

1. Have you ever babysat a transport of highly enriched nuclear material?

It is a massive undertaking. Planning and security are similar to a presidential movement and the risk of traffic accident is ALWAYS a very real possibility. I used to track such shipments and I have tremendous confidence that if widespread use of nuclear is the choice we much make, one of the prices will be the expense and danger of moving the fuels overland for reprocessing.

The image you drew was nonsense, of course, but I though I'd add a realistic perspective.

Some day maybe I'll share a story of one such crash with you. It was classified at the time, but I doubt if it is any longer.
No fatalities, but it illustrates some of the characteristics you often (usually falselyIMO) ascribe to people who don't like nuclear.

[Dogmudgeon]

2. Transport of highly enriched nuclear material

I'm aware that it's elaborate. My father used to work at a Nike-Ajax/Nike-Hercules base. He was a nuclear missile and munitions technician, trainer, and chief. He occasionally took me to see the convoys when I was a little kid, although I am not certain whether they carried nuclear bombs or material.

As an officer in the Air Force with experience with nuclear technology, you surely must be aware that the civil nuclear energy program does NOT use highly enriched uranium. It must be mixed down for optimum "burn". In fact, CANDU reactors are designed to use LOW-enriched uranium.

"The image you drew was nonsense, of course, but I though I'd add a realistic perspective."

The image was actually drawn by an anti-nuclear auteur who sought to ridicule one of Areva's videos. The artistic decisions, like the green-yellow gas and the Titan II missile, were made by Monsieur Sudotone.

The "LOLCats"-style quip at the end was mine.

"Some day maybe I'll share a story of one such crash with you. It was classified at the time, but I doubt if it is any longer.
No fatalities ..."

Yes, you should share the story. I strongly oppose nuclear weapons development. However, you should probably also include some background information, because nuclear weapons are almost always discussed in an incidental way in this forum and by the mainstream media in general. The Bush administration has come to depend on popular fears of nuclear technology in its terrorism propaganda in much the same way fear of anthrax was manipulated in late 2001 and early 2002.

" ... it illustrates some of the characteristics you often (usually falselyIMO) ascribe to people who don't like nuclear."

I have to admit, using an undefined term in a heated topic is a clever rhetorical technique. Erickson and Chomsky have written at length about the effect -- and fishermen depend on its long phylogenetic history for their success.

--p!