Wind Turbines going up on Allegheny Fron t

““Nor is there any agreement that Agent Orange has caused any abnormalities from it's use in Nam."

Actually, the VA takes care of your non-hodkins lymphomas, and gives you disability if you were in areas with agent orange in Nam. They have admitted and agreed that it has caused cancer, just very very quietly. You have to have a problem to find this out. My uncle is currently trying to live as long as he can with agent orange induced cancer. He got benefits by reporting exactly where he was on what dates to figure out if he'd been affected by agent orange.”

“They have now yes... but it was a very hard fought battle to get it that way. It was not an easy fight.”

“...an area the size of Pennsylvania will be uninhabitable!"

Every morning hitting the main road I see the tops of the cooling towers of TMI. Might explain why there's still no development on the south side of my hill. :)”

“We live less than two miles from one of the major transportation routes for nuclear waste from Berwick (40 miles away) and TMI (Yeah they truck it up here to take it out west) We are in the major disaster event area for the Berwick plant. I don't know of any industrial complex where the disaster area extends 40+ miles from the plant. Plus, the shipments of waste are done in secret, using unmarked trucks and train cars so as to minimize the publicity profile against attack. This stuff is not as safe as the nuclear proponents would have us believe.”

“I'm still not convinced that the release info on 3MI is correct. There have been too many other releases from reactors which were covered up, for decades. The one in the southwest US (I mentioned it above, and I still can't remember the name of the facilitiy) is one.

Here's another in the UK:

http://environment.newscientist.com/article/mg19626243.200-extent-of-windscale-contamination-was-covered-up.html”

“Define injured...

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1619749

From the NIH”

“Its much closer to being as safe as nuclear proponents would have us believe than it as dangerous as anti nuclear people would have us believe.

I live in a town that has a facility for making nuclear rods. There have been accidents involving vehicles delivering material here. The few that I can remember had no spillage of material even inside the multiple levels of containment in the transportation vehicles. There is also a Nuclear Reactor (owned by Progress Energy - formally Carolina Power and light) 20 miles south of where I live. Its 2 units have been operating since the mid 70's and have recently been authorized to keep operating for another 30 years. This facility is right next door to Military Ocean Terminal Sunny Point which is the the largest ammunition shipping port in the nation.

So I have a lot to lose if there was a Nuclear incident, but I am not a reactionary who is led around by panic. There are plenty of facts out there that show Nuclear Energy is not as dangerous as its proponents scream.

I have friends who work, or worked, in that plant. Some were engineers who worked in the control room and one was a crew leader who was one of the working stiffs at the site. Do you know that many of these areas that are designated as contaminated are so not harmful that they are delineated with ropes. On this side of the rope you wear full radiation gear and 1 foot away over the rope you can wear regular clothes and carry your lunch pail.

Things get reported as "incidents" that have nothing to do with the nuclear side of the plant and probably occur on a regular basis in every other industrial plant in the country without even a mention at a weekely safety meeting.”

“rev, yep, we should outlaw Nuke plants and rid the world of stress related psychosis. There would be no more "battlefield fatigue", no PMS for women, no more counseling for cops who use their firearms in the performance of their duties. Right, its only Nuclear Energy that causes stress in its workers.”

“In March, 1982, the American Journal of Public Health reported: "During the first two quarters of 1978, the neonatal mortality rate within a ten-mile radius of Three Mile Island was 8.6 and 7.6 per 1,000 live births, respectively. During the first quarter of 1979, following the startup of accident prone Unit 2, the rate jumped to 17.2; it increased to 19.3 in the quarter following the accident at TMI and returned to 7.8 and 9.3, respectively, in the last two quarters of 1979." Dr. Gordon MacLeod, Secretary, Pennsylvania Department of Health.

http://www.tmia.com/history/tmilegalhistory.html

MacLoed was dismissed shortly after that report. Coincidence... sure”

“rev, yep, we should outlaw Nuke plants and rid the world of stress related psychosis. There would be no more "battlefield fatigue", no PMS for women, no more counseling for cops who use their firearms in the performance of their duties. Right, its only Nuclear Energy that causes stress in its workers.”
hyway
10:08:39 AM
10/05/07

can't argue the facts so you jump to hyperbole... typical...

Spoken like a true shareholder.
last edited: 10/05/07 7:29:30 AM”

“BTW... how close do you live to a nuclear power plant?

Less than five miles.”

“I was arguing against your point, and I didn't give it the serious you thought it deserved because the "injuries" you cited had nothing to do with nuclear energy except that accidents are stressful situations. So I just pointed out other stressful vocations and incidences. Also, I bet if the real cause could be known for the neonatal mortality rate (if the data for the study wasn't heavily misrepresented) had more to do with stress caused by panic inducing media coverage than contaminates in the air. Especially since you said the rate jumped up prior to the accident when there was no contamination of the surrounding air.”

“Also, I bet if the real cause could be known for the neonatal mortality rate (if the data for the study wasn't heavily misrepresented) had more to do with stress caused by panic inducing media coverage than contaminates in the air

This brings us back to the logic about the Agent Orange. Thanks for verifying its relevence. It's always something else.”

“AHEM


more people have died in the back seat of Teddy Kennedy's Car than from Nuclear Incidents in the US.

TMI showed we could handle the problem.”

“Rev, I like how you ignored that the increase in mortality rate began 3 months prior to the accident. Explain to me how the accident caused those?”

“I like how you ignored the rates _after_ the shutdown of the plant went back to pre-on-line rates. Explain that....”

“I did, nany times. Stress from media induced panic caused them to go up, and the shut down of the plant caused it to go down. Yet the material is still there in the concrete and can never be removed, yet the infant mortality rate went down when the "appearance" of the all clear was given.

I have given you answers for every question. yet you discount every answer and ask for a new answer for the same question. You are just blind to facts and are all about the fear factor. You state stress as a injury caused by the Nuclear Industry when you know, or at least you should or you should turn in your collar, that every industry and human undertaking causes stress.”

“but but..Hyway these are the Libbies...facts don't matter unless they come from THEIR side.”

“actually people have died from nuclear accidents, but they have mostly died contained.

The one tech was talking about (I think) was a US Army test reactor that melted down and killed all 3 people on site. It was what proved that a nuclear accident would just melt down and put itself out (as it were) instead of exploding like a nuclear bomb.”

“What you are suggesting is that the paranoid. panic whipping press and media was statistically less in the quarter _after_ the accident than during? Please... that begs credulity. And if that is so... why was MacLoed dismissed for his findings. It seems to me they would have been useful to a government in bed with MetEd and stuff to hide. No hyway.... you can believe what you want. Please note I have not used sources that could be construed as "tin foil hat conspiracy theorists." They make an even more interesting case, but you are not going to recognize them as useful.”

“but but..hyway these are connies..facts don't matter unless they help the bottom line.”

“You state stress as a injury caused by the Nuclear Industry

Ok... first of all I did not state that... the NIH did. But of course they are tin hat conspiracy theorists. Further your comment makes it clear to me you never even accessed the article. So much for informed discussion. I'm done.”

“LOL the Nuclear Industry offers a great way to stop our energy dependence...but the libbies hate it since it makes us less "dependendent".”

“First off, can we agree that if we submit an article in support of our arguments that we ARE SAYING what the people in the article are saying? If you aren't saying that stress is an injury caused by the nuclear industry then why did you post that link?

Secondly, I did access the article thats how I knew that it said people who worked at the plant had high levels of stress after the accident. So yeah, I accessed it and my argument still stands, stress is induced in any industrial accident and thus is a wash when looking at the safety of an individual industry.

You have not countered any of my direct replies to your arguments. Its very handy to complain about uniformed argument when you can't support your own argument that the accident at 3 mile island caused infant mortalities 3 months prior to the accident.

But lets say we did grant you the argument that injuries to unborn babies began with the plant coming online and ended with the plant going off line. In that case, then you are saying that there are no long term affects to humans from nuclear energy? It only happens while the plant is operating?”

“You're sounding more like a frenchman than ever- you dudes sure nuked the wind mill subject. Nukes are a must until we learn about the sun, but how long til ones on line? The downside is , of course, dependence on big Corps. or more capitalism without competition-what's the name of that?”

“wow... what a concept. Nuclear power plants are dangerous while on line.... hwere have I heard that before... oh yeah not from you... They are safe as anything. Which is why they have disaster plans that cover more than 40+ miles... oh well... live happy

As far as the media hype was concerned... the article I posted reflected the media hype and it was worse after the accident than before. Sorry but that looks your key defense just went south. oh well I really am done.”

““What you are suggesting is that the paranoid. panic whipping press and media was statistically less in the quarter _after_ the accident than during? "
Ramblinrev
11:02:39 AM
10/05/07

Sorry, but luckily for you, I missed this post earlier. Actually, I didn't suggest that. I suggested that the quarter after was just as panic stricken by the media as during. Your statement shows that you didn't even understand you're own source.

Here is what you posted ...

"During the first two quarters of 1978, the neonatal mortality rate within a ten-mile radius of Three Mile Island was 8.6 and 7.6 per 1,000 live births, respectively. During the first quarter of 1979, following the startup of accident prone Unit 2, the rate jumped to 17.2; it increased to 19.3 in the quarter following the accident at TMI and returned to 7.8 and 9.3, respectively, in the last two quarters of 1979."

So breaking it down so we both understand.

Jan - Jun of 1978: low mortality rate.

Jan - Mar of 1979: High mortality rate (Start up of plant to the accident at the end of march) what was the data for the 2 quarters not listed (Jul-Dec, 1978). Were they already slowly rising, because if the jump was sudden between the 4th quarter of 1978 and the 1st quarter of 1979 I think they would have used that quarter in their argument? How does these deaths correlate with an accident that hadn't even happened yet?

April - Jun, 1979: mortality rate stays high (media panic continues for 3 months after the accident). here is where your statement above assumes I was saying the mortality rate went back down. I think you just misread the data thinking it was the quater immediately after the accident where the rate went back down.

July - Dec, 1979: rate returns to normal. Media found another bone to chew as it so often does. New news is more profitable than old news.”

“BTW, I never claimed it was safe. Nothing is safe. Coal mining isn't safe. Coal fired plants aren't safe. Coal trains aren't safe. But I bet nuclear energy is safer and cleaner than coal mining. How many wind farms will we need to supply all the electrical needs of the US?”

“The difference between accidents at coal plants/trains/mines and nuclear is night and day. A coal plant catches fire or has a steam explosion and a few people at the plant die, and emergency workers can walk right back into the plant the next day to clean up. A nuclear plant catches fire or has a steam explosion (like Chernobyl) and hundreds to thousands die. Nobody can live near the plant for 100 years. Its a matter of scale.”

“Tech...lets not use Chernobyl...that is a design that was ONLY acceptable by the Socialists in the USSR. You will not find that type of Reactor anywhere else.

I would be alot more panicked about the whole power thing if your leaders were not so psycho about wind farms in their own backyards.”

“I agree the scale is different, but even with Chernobyl a study by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and World Health Organization (WHO), state there have been less than 100 (i think 56) direct deaths due to the accident and its expected that there will be 9000 more die from cancer related injuries. Of course, greenpeace says the number is 270,000. I guess its who you want to believe.

Also, there is a 30 mile zone (and some smaller other areas) around the plant that is closed to redevelopment, but everywhere else is open. Even withing the zone people have moved back in. Some say the animals are thriving. Even at the plant site people are still working to clean it up (of course they are using protection).

A coal mine can, and has, burned for decades. Strip mining changes our environment permanently as well. A tsunami can kill 100 of thousands. a plane crashing into a building can kill 3000. A war can kill millions and destroy cities. Our highways pave over miles and miles of countryside and kills tens of thousands every year.

We live with risk every day. Nuclear Energy is less dangerous than most stuff we put up with on a daily basis.”

“XL - Chernobyl is only one of several reactors that have had catastrophic nuclear releases. Its happened in the US (not talking about 3MI) and the UK, too. A "modern" pebble-bed reactor jammed and caused an atmospheric release, so claiming that just one type of reactor had a problem isn't true.

Hyway, yes, we loose a dozen (more?) people a day to traffic accidents. We live with that risk; we could instead all walk, but the technological advantage outweighs the risk. We could live with the nuclear risk like most of France does, and on the surface it has a technological advantage, too. Just like cars. Just like cars, though, there are risks at deeper levels (like exhaust pollution with cars) which far outweigh the advantages. I would love to love nuclear, but once you add in all the embodied energy and radiological risks I think it looses its advantage when there are other far less damaging energy technologies out there today.”

“there aren't any technologies that can be used widespread until we can get a space station to harvest the sun and beam it down to us. How many wind farms will we need to provide the current US need for electricity? How many will we need 20 years from now?

Seriously, provide me with some links that show me a reasonable alternative to nuclear power. Of course, some people will tell me that coal powered plants are reasonable, but the side affects are atrocious. I might be able to buy into wind power if I can find a serious study that shows it can supply our countries electrical needs. You see, I don't want to ease the burden on coal fired plants. i want to get rid of them and the coal industry.”

“IF....and ONLY IF we begin to seek the wisdom of the Flying Spaghetti Monster will we learn the truth.”

“There's the agenda at work. Thanks for being honest.”

“which agenda? The one to make the Flying Spaghetti Monster the leader of the New World Order or the one that hopes to make the world a better place to live in? Or yours ... to fear monger with little or no evidence and then get offended when someone calls you on it?
last edited: 10/05/07 12:12:53 PM”

“HYWAY....(nervously)...do not offend he of the airborne pasta and sauce......GOOD LORD MAN...”

“you're lovely hyperbole again....
no where did faith enter this so you lose on that one.
I have posted every support for every statement made. You have posted squat. So call your mom.....

Grow up hyway......”

“I never said anything about faith. That was XL's crack. Although I don't think he was making fun of religion, if I am not mistaken, he is pretty religious. I called you a fear monger because that is what you are doing. Spreading fear without facts.

You think you posted facts? You claim babies died months before the accident because of the accident a fact? Your post about the media frenzy going up after the accident as a counter to my claim that the ongoing high mortality rate lasted as long as the media frenzy showed that you can't even comprehend the data that you posted. I have never thought badly of you before, but now I am disappointed to find out how biased and uniformed you are. I have posted facts. I have countered your facts at every turn, including your silly statement about stress related accidents as if nuclear energy has cornered the market on stress.

Please show me where i posted something to you that showed that I needed to grow up.

You spout crap that because you live near a nuke plant you have some special knowledge that others don't. I tell you I live near one with 2 units that have been operating for 30 years as well as a separate plant that produces nuclear fuel rods and has many trucks that deliver uranium on our roads and you completely ignore it.

I think it is you that should reassess their intellectual maturity.”

““which agenda? The one to make the Flying Spaghetti Monster the leader of the New World Order or the one that hopes to make the world a better place to live in? Or yours ... to fear monger with little or no evidence and then get offended when someone calls you on it?
last edited: 10/05/07 3:12:53 PM”
hyway
3:09:56 PM
10/05/07

caught in a lie again....

you are slipping dude.....”

“god you are dense.

this is what you said right after XL's post about the flying spaghetti monster.

“There's the agenda at work. Thanks for being honest.”
Ramblinrev
2:06:37 PM
10/05/07

I was asking which agenda you were referring to, XL's, Mine, or yours. I have never made any claims that I didn't support nuclear energy over coal mining and/or windmills. So my agenda was clear. I was wondering if you were referring to XL's spaghetti monster or your fear mongering. Or maybe something i said early on finally filtered down through your bias and you figured out I was against the coal industry. Hopefully that means some of the other facts might finally reach you.”

“http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/10/09/pip.wind.energy/index.html

A wind turbine as "Eco-bling?"”

“Kennedy has fought the Cape Wind project for eight years, arguing it would kill birds and endanger sea life while imperiling the scenic area's tourism and fishing industries.

Liberalism means saving the planet in someone else's backyard.”

“yeah, they already are all over the back. noy a pretty sight, i tell ya.”