Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 05/19/2024 2:55:09 PM PDT by Twotone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Twotone

Seems “scientists” don’t actually believe in science.


2 posted on 05/19/2024 2:59:21 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (The worst thing about censorship is █████ ██ ████ ████ ████ █ ███████ ████. FJB.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Twotone

We have eight decades of experience with radiation workers now. That is more than a sufficient sample size. If LNT was true, they should easily be able to prove it through epidemiological studies. ‘They’ have not.


3 posted on 05/19/2024 3:09:59 PM PDT by rottndog (What comes after America?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Twotone

BTW....highest lifetime occupational radiation exposure belongs to...

Airline pilots.


4 posted on 05/19/2024 3:11:18 PM PDT by rottndog (What comes after America?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Twotone

I always thought that the biggest long term problem with nuclear power was how to store/handle/protect the spent radioactive fuel.


5 posted on 05/19/2024 3:34:52 PM PDT by Reynoldo (BurnLootMurder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Twotone

Thanks for posting!!

I’m an HPS member….


8 posted on 05/19/2024 3:49:44 PM PDT by fishtank (The denial of original sin is the root of liberalism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Twotone

“However, it’s been stifled for decades based on one deeply flawed scientific model: the linear no-threshold (LNT) model. “

Having worked at over 15 nuclear plants including 10 new startups that has never been stifling.


14 posted on 05/19/2024 4:58:54 PM PDT by TexasGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Twotone

Anti-nuke people often like to claim that storage of nuclear waste is the reason for not building more nuclear plants.

The nuclear industry in the U.S. produces about 4000 tons of waste per year. That may seem like a lot but, consider that we produce about 275 MILLION tons of non-nuclear, bio and chemical hazardous waste. That is about 70,000 times more than nuclear waste. But do we shut down the bio and chemical industries for that?

Also, people worry about the long lifetimes of some of the nuclear waste. But the lifetime is the inverse of the decay rate. Materials with long lifetimes are not very radioactive, and materials that are very radioactive, have very short lifetimes. Meanwhile, bio and chemical hazardous waste can be hazardous for ever.


21 posted on 05/19/2024 7:10:02 PM PDT by pjd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Twotone
Because SCIENCE!TM
23 posted on 05/19/2024 7:53:02 PM PDT by grey_whiskers ( The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson