i-before-e rules are weird and unscientific.

-Salshdot user jafac's sig
Sticky Posts
The Ghettotenna
SVG Icons
Brew Your Own Damn Beer
Latest Comments
Objects in the Mirror (4 comments)
Doo Dah Doo Doo Doo Dah Dah Doo... Big News Coming Your Way!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (3 comments)
SVG Icons (7 comments)
A Revolution in Taco Consumption (5 comments)
Ball Wire II (3 comments)
Links & Friends
PVP Online
Boing Boing
The Sneeze
Penny Arcade
glitch13.com :.::.: ..:.::. :.:::... Home | About | Feedback | Archive | RSS

Category: Rant
Sunday, January 27th, 2002 @ 04:15 pm
Posted By Brent
The reach of Chernobyl's radiation
I hope you don't mind my lack of pithy in the explanation of this update; to assume my point of view, one must understand my perspective.

I remember reading a Sci-Fi story about a voyage to Alpha-Centauri. It was supposedly happening in current times where three scientists had created a drug and accompaning chambers that would allow one to reamain in suspended animation for around 250+ years.

They began the voyage with much world-wide fanfair. The person from who's perspective the story was told had the task of waking in fifty years to transmit a message back to Earth as a sign that the first leg of the mission was a success. He did so and re-entered the 'sleep'. They were to take shifts of waking and journaling the trip. When it was his time to wake again, there was a huge, hulking spaceship burning in flames behind the ship they were in.

The story went on and they finally reached the distant solar system only to find that Earthlings were already there. As it turns out, by the time they reached the star, around 550+ years, humanity had technologically surpassed them and could now travel between the systems in around 45 minutes. The ship they had seen burning was a failed attempt during early progress in this advanced technology.

End Preface.

We have not built a nuclear power plant in twenty years. People bitch that we burn too much fossil fuel to create power, but the shadow of Chernobyl has loomed over the industry since the big accident, and people are afraid to try it again. This, of course, hasn't halted the operation of several plants that were created before, but we're still stagnating.

We have to realize that advancement in the field has kept it's original inertia, and has gotten to a point where a catastrophe of that magnitude has reached an almost miniscule amount of probability, and it will continue to do so. It will continue to do so thanks to mistakes like Chernobyl. That's how life works. You smack your bike into the pavement, you pick yourself up, and you've learned one more thing that you shouldn't do when riding a bike.


NAME: foo
WEBSITE: http://foo
Tuesday, January 29th, 2002 @ 07:10 pm
I'd say make a million nuke plants but make them bomb proof with a hojillion failsafes.

NAME: glitch13
Monday, January 28th, 2002 @ 11:12 pm
So foo, I'm not getting a bead on your argument. Should we build more nuke plants, or stagnate?

NAME: imaclone
Monday, January 28th, 2002 @ 07:00 pm
you gotta break a few eggs to make an omelette...

NAME: foo
WEBSITE: http://foo
Sunday, January 27th, 2002 @ 09:17 pm
One problem though...

If Tyler Durden straps plastique to the innards of a coal plant everyone for about half a mile will be toasted.

Do the same thing to a Nuclear Plant on the westbank and you can forget about New Orleans, Metairie, Baton Rouge, and half of the Gulf of Mexico.

We're under population pressure and while some men are reacting with hot boysex, other more angry folk are gunning down high schools and bombing shit all to hell. You have more than safety to consider...there's also the inevitable bomber. The more plants you have, the more likely one will be bombed.