Level 134 Comments: Respected Member Of Famiry
OfflineSend mail to Luni Block Luni Invite Luni to be your friend
|Last status update:|| |
|Date Signed Up:||10/22/2010|
|FunnyJunk Career Stats|
|Content Thumbs:||831 total, 1032 , 201|
|Comment Thumbs:||341 total, 676 , 335|
|Content Level Progress:|| 10% (1/10) |
Level 83 Content: Srs Business → Level 84 Content: Srs Business
|Comment Level Progress:|| 10% (1/10) |
Level 134 Comments: Respected Member Of Famiry → Level 135 Comments: Respected Member Of Famiry
|Times Content Favorited:||64 times|
|Total Comments Made:||252|
|Favorite Tags:||Google (2) | Racist (2)|
latest user's comments
|#58 - Nuclear power, is actually 1. Safe if protected and maintai… [+] (11 new replies)||06/02/2011 on world news||+7|
#66 - mjcninjapanda (06/02/2011) [-]
I half agree with you. Nuclear power may very well be the power of the future(even if Germany claim to be shutting all theres down by 2022). But meltdowns even if they are unlikely will happen eventually and it's not just down to incompetence. also it's not easy to dispose of at ALL, it takes hundreds of years for the waste to be broken down and right now they are having major problems with storage.And as far as Chernobyl goes, what the Chernobyl babies who are born (and continue to be) disfigured with short lifespan. The area is now a ghost town that's no one is sick....no one lives there.
#73 - Jewssassin (06/02/2011) [-]
As I understand it, even if there is a melt down in most modern plants (like the plants the French have, which are the best I believe) it would do barely anything because of all the safety precautions. Chernobyl had like NO protection around the core and wasnt there just no meltdown at Three Mile Island, just almost had one but it was but promptly stopped?
#76 - mjcninjapanda (06/02/2011) [-]
Well i'm not talking about how likely it is but if it does happen it can be devastating depending on it's were abouts. For example, i live in Ireland and if there was a meltdown at the Sellifield nuclear plant(which is in Wales) I would have to move no question due to the prevailing winds. Granted there safety precautions but nature can cause them. And if the sea level rises it could very well happen.
#65 - nowayimgonasayyes (06/02/2011) [-]
Not completely true, to maintain a stable fission reaction you need to keep the temperature of the fuel within a certain temperature barrier, if this is to high, or too low, the reaction will not occur. In turn, to do so, you need to wast a lot of power. Also, enriching Uranium is a difficult process that takes a long time and energy. Then, to dispose of the radioactive isotopes that are left over after the fission reaction occurs it is necessary to dig deep under ground to berry the radioactive wast, and this damages the ecology greatly... Finally any small malfunctions will result in a another Chernobyl or what happened in Japan. Thus, the question arises, to go nuclear or to continue using fossil fuel as the world's main energy supply?
#80 - anon (06/02/2011) [-]
thumbed down for being anonamous but i just finished 2 years of study of nuclear power. the explosions in japan were not nuclear explosions, they were explosions at a nuclear plant, difference. Know your shit. Bitch.
#105 - nowayimgonasayyes (06/02/2011) [-]
First off, I am Russian so i know what happened in Chernobyl. Second, what i said was that any malfunctions, even the smallest one will have catastrophic consequences. Learn to read. Third off, you seem to know that control rods exist, but you don't seem to know what they are used for. During a fission reaction atoms of Uranium are hit with neutrons. One neutrons which collides with a single atom of Uranium will knock three other neutrons from that atom and send them colliding into other atoms.This is called a chain reaction. Control rods are made from silicium or silicon. They have a property which allows the to absorb stray neutrons. When a non-nuclear explosion occurs the ability to control the reaction in this way is lost.
#63 - SexHarassmentPanda (06/02/2011) [-]
"easy to dispose of"?
that is nuclear powers main flaw actually, what to do with the waste?
I am 100% with you that it is the safest and cleanest energy source, but when something out of human control happens, it is the most dangerous
Fukushima was excellently maintained, but when they had an earthquake which damaged it, they barely avoided a massive disaster when the radiation started leaking
|#57 - Internet Rule #34 States: If it exists there is porn of it. NO…||06/02/2011 on Rule 34||+6|
|#1 - **Luni rolls 07** Dubs and I'm lucky||05/28/2011 on Luni's profile||0|
|#77 - Picture||04/08/2011 on Something Goofy||0|
|#138 - Picture||04/07/2011 on A MANS WORST TORTURE||+4|
|#923 - Picture||04/07/2011 on Baawwwww Warning||0|
|#134 - I captain picard loved to party he'd be captain Partyard||03/18/2011 on Sextrek||0|
|#92 - If captain picard were a baked good he'd be captain Piecard [+] (3 new replies)||03/18/2011 on Sextrek||+4|
|#83 - If Captain Picard were really dumb he would be Captain Tard. [+] (5 new replies)||03/18/2011 on Sextrek||0|
|#283 - Bong=Ancient artifact?! BITCHES IT'S A LAMP! [+] (2 new replies)||03/16/2011 on Oblivious Parents||+16|