Nuclear. . took 3. photo with And this my friends, is called pollution ', Actually I 'laat@ N this is just steam. It' s a cooling tower for nuclear reactors. 2
Home Funny Pictures YouTube Funny Videos Funny GIFs Text/Links Channels Search

Nuclear

took 3. photo with
And this my friends, is called pollution ',
Actually I 'laat@ N this is just steam. It' s a cooling
tower for nuclear reactors.
2 hours ago I Trollr, 1 I in
l © no its a nuclear plant
2 hours ago I Like
Intellivision, ,
Jif
AMN
...
+1623
Views: 57046
Favorited: 82
Submitted: 08/16/2013
Share On Facebook
Add to favorites Subscribe to phanact E-mail to friend submit to reddit
Share image on facebook Share on StumbleUpon Share on Tumblr Share on Pinterest Share on Google Plus E-mail to friend

Comments(273):

[ 273 comments ]
Show:   Top Rated Controversial Best Lowest Rated Newest Per page:
Order:

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Anonymous commenting is allowed
#268 - xerxic (08/17/2013) [-]
what-if.xkcd.com/29/
I'm just gonna leave this here.
User avatar #264 - richhobo (08/17/2013) [-]
Wind power is very popular because it has alot of fans.
Comment has been flagged   Hide Hide All +Fav (0) Reply 0
#262 - miltonbousquet (08/17/2013) [-]
This image was flagged 12/30/2013
#254 - gazajunk (08/17/2013) [-]
**gazajunk rolled a random image posted in comment #76 at Albino Midgets Fisting Cats ** MFW
**gazajunk rolled a random image posted in comment #76 at Albino Midgets Fisting Cats ** MFW
User avatar #253 - vedgetable (08/17/2013) [-]
since where all beeing dicks, im pretty sure she meant the the fact that the nuclear reactor also creates nuclear waste, wich, ofcourse is some of the worst **** out there
User avatar #249 - MegaAwesomeSauce (08/17/2013) [-]
Water vapour is a green house gas
User avatar #245 - toastyghosty (08/17/2013) [-]
The fact that some people don't understand who's the idiot here really disappoints me.
It's the guy who thinks it's pollution.
#238 - notified (08/17/2013) [-]
When I was a kid, my parents used to tell me that they were cloud makers...

Boy do I feel stupid now.
#267 to #238 - xerxic (08/17/2013) [-]
Yes, technically, your parents were correct. For once, SCIENCE has been cool and not ruined a child's world view on something, but actually confirmed it. Thanks SCIENCE!
User avatar #242 to #238 - hailhisnoodliness (08/17/2013) [-]
but they do make clouds, soo...
#232 - drunkasaurus (08/17/2013) [-]
I mean... When nuclear plants DO **** up, it's basically the worst kind of pollution imaginable, aside from having a bomb dropped on your city. Not saying they're not a good way to generate energy 99% of the time, but they need to stop building them so close to major population areas. Build a few miles of power lines, put the damn things in the middle of nowhere, and stop being cheap.
#243 to #232 - mkgt (08/17/2013) [-]
It's worse than dropping a bomb on your city. People can still inhabit Hiroshima, but Chernobyl won't be inhabited by humans for 25,000 years.
#237 to #232 - xfrankie (08/17/2013) [-]
While I generally agree with your comment, you mustn't forget that you need a metric ******** of people for maintenance and to keep the powerplant working... And unless you want the people to commute for a long time back and forth every day, the plant itself needs to be somewhat close to a city.
Pic related, the npp near our town sometimes literally steals the sun.
#250 to #237 - jackii (08/17/2013) [-]
>put them in the middle of Ethiopian desert
>train Ethiopians to work at plant
>build accommodation on site for them
>pay with food, water, supplies and power
far away from major cities, better lives for Ethiopians, cheap labour, power for the western world


#221 - lawander **User deleted account** (08/17/2013) [-]
So which is right?
#248 to #221 - kanedam ONLINE (08/17/2013) [-]
here take this... might come in handy!
User avatar #228 to #221 - neoexdeath ONLINE (08/17/2013) [-]
Technically, the only pollution is toxic waste. The ideal method of getting rid of the stuff would probably be to jettison it into deep space...which is forbidden by a number of treaties due to how easy it is to CLAIM you're depositing it into deep space, and acting all shocked when the stuff hits an enemy nation.
User avatar #244 to #228 - hisnameisjake (08/17/2013) [-]
I heard that the only reason we don't put nuclear waste in space because we don't have a way to get it there
User avatar #225 to #221 - kriszifcation (08/17/2013) [-]
The only pollution a nuclear plant is giving off, is the nuclearwaste-material when the rods are used up. - which is a danger in itself, but not so much on the climate, compared to Co2 emissions.
User avatar #222 to #221 - decieverofthegods **User deleted account** (08/17/2013) [-]
It is steam. No pollution is given off at all.
#211 - anonymous (08/17/2013) [-]
RRRREEEEEEEEEEEPPPPPPPPPPOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSSSSTTTTT
#202 - emostrawberry (08/17/2013) [-]
AM I the only one who saw dat ass?
0
#220 to #202 - xerros has deleted their comment [-]
#217 to #202 - Gerex ONLINE (08/17/2013) [-]

I've been here too long.
User avatar #207 to #206 - emostrawberry (08/17/2013) [-]
the cloud thingy look at it
#208 to #207 - loopymoomoo (08/17/2013) [-]
i saw but i accidently ******* the wrong image file and would have looked like a retard, but i see it now.
but anyways heres that image
User avatar #197 - getoutoftheshower (08/17/2013) [-]
Technically steam is a pollutant....
#240 to #197 - anonymous (08/17/2013) [-]
No it's not. It's water.
User avatar #184 - omninickk (08/17/2013) [-]
In case you guys are unsure and want to make a comment but don't have sufficient knowledge:

White "clouds" emitting from a stack like that is actually very clean. If it were grey or black, then there would actually be a problem. They filter out the chemicals then release the colorless clouds out.

Nuclear reactors and nuclear plants are VERY safe and well kept. The only waste they produce is depleted rods, which is dumped in the sea miles away from civilization, where it cannot possibly do anything dangerous since it is no longer radioactive.
#263 to #184 - anonymous (08/17/2013) [-]
Dude, spent fuel rods are radioactive as **** , they literally hold all the fission products in them so they don't get released.
User avatar #265 to #263 - omninickk (08/17/2013) [-]
Like I have previously said, I said that with the intention to bring up the point that the radioactive properties have no effect on us from where we are. Obviously, that 1/4 of the rod has fission products and undergoes beta decay, but it can't directly effect us from there. Anyway, as I have learned today, they no longer dump them in the ocean.
User avatar #201 to #184 - gustaviaable (08/17/2013) [-]
And nuclear plants usually don't use their plutonium rods untill they are completely depleted. They usually switch after 3/4 of the plutonium is used.
#200 to #184 - gustaviaable (08/17/2013) [-]
>nuclear plants are VERY safe and well kept.
Atleast safe in civilized countries
#192 to #184 - blakeserene ONLINE (08/17/2013) [-]
Saying they are no longer radioactive is misleading. The rods are still very radioactive (see source--number ten specifically, under the cons section--which lists both pros and cons) and stay radioactive for thousands of years. Depleted means only that the rods are not radioactive enough to be effective in electrical production, not that they are harmless.
User avatar #195 to #192 - omninickk (08/17/2013) [-]
In my saying that, I meant that out there, the radioactive properties harbor no dangers to society and the radioactive properties are meaningless. True, they still hold radioactive contents, but it does not effect us in any way. I guess I phrased things wrong.
#199 to #195 - blakeserene ONLINE (08/17/2013) [-]
Your information is out of date. Sea disposal was banned by international law in 1993. Radioactive material is buried underground in bunkers.

" "Ocean disposal", done by USSR, UK, Switzerland, USA, Belgium, France, The Netherlands, Japan, Sweden, Russia, Germany, Italy and South Korea. (1954–93) This is no longer permitted by international agreements."

Source is Wikipedia, but can be backed up through their sources.
User avatar #203 to #199 - omninickk (08/17/2013) [-]
1993!? How the **** is it that they still teach this to kids at school? I learned this long after sea disposal was banned... ******* schools...
#204 to #203 - blakeserene ONLINE (08/17/2013) [-]
I stopped trusting the school system in middle school, when I realized all I had to do to pass was feed the teachers the same **** they spewed out to me. Self education is the only way to control what you learn and insure the information is up to date.
User avatar #205 to #204 - omninickk (08/17/2013) [-]
To conclude this whole section: **** school. Buy books.
#193 to #192 - blakeserene ONLINE (08/17/2013) [-]
You need to login to view this link Sorry forgot the source.
User avatar #185 to #184 - akho (08/17/2013) [-]
***** , which part of Ukraine is uninhabitable?

Don't forget the stalker..
User avatar #189 to #185 - omninickk (08/17/2013) [-]
If I may correct my last comment: The actual cause of Chernobyl, now I remember it, was their accidental exposing of the graphite moderator to common air, which caused an ignition. Still, same thing, they are strictly ruled now.
User avatar #187 to #185 - omninickk (08/17/2013) [-]
Chernobyl was caused by a fire, whilst being managed by the Soviet Union. The control and management for nuclear plants is much more strict and careful, and that was quite a long time ago, back when they didn't know that uncontrolled fires would release radioactive particles in the air.
#183 - andovaredoras (08/17/2013) [-]
I think i found the Nuclear Plants. It is said that these are the cause for the worst disease ever imagined: Life. It seems to have a 100% Death-rate.
#176 - alarmdemon (08/17/2013) [-]
i dont know why but a burning inferno of rage envelopes in me when people try to pretend to know what they are talking about.
User avatar #198 to #176 - AreyouSerious (08/17/2013) [-]
No Corey, don't kill Mr.Feeny!
[ 273 comments ]
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)