California has so much solar power it's throwing it away

[NNadir]

11. Really 5000 "degrees," higher than the boiling point of zirconium metal?

Last edited Fri Apr 26, 2024, 08:28 AM - Edit history (1)

The core at Fukushima vaporized? Who knew?

I note the switch from every nuclear reactor for this made up figure (with no units) of 5000 "degrees" to the big, big, big, big Bogeyman at Fukushima.

It would be interesting to learn of something called a reference from a reputable source for this extraordinary claim of 5000 "degrees" but I'm familiar, certainly, over all the years of antinukes cheering for the destruction of the planet by the application of fear and ignorance, with which only antivaxxers can compare in terms of death tolls, although Covid never killed roughly 19,000 people day like air pollution - not even counting climate change - does. In most cases antinukes don't have references. It's easier to make stuff up. However, if one relies on "making stuff up" one risks confronting people with legitimate real knowledge of the case.

Here is something called a reference, with textual commentary from a reputable source (the premier medical journal Lancet) for the number of people killed by air pollution egged on by antinukism:

: Global burden of 87 risk factors in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019 (Lancet Volume 396, Issue 10258, 17–23 October 2020, Pages 1223-1249). This study is a huge undertaking and the list of authors from around the world is rather long. These studies are always open sourced; and I invite people who want to carry on about Fukushima to open it and search the word "radiation." It appears once. Radon, a side product brought to the surface by fracking while we all wait for the grand so called "renewable energy" nirvana that did not come, is not here and won't come, appears however: Household radon, from the decay of natural uranium, which has been cycling through the environment ever since oxygen appeared in the Earth's atmosphere.

Here is what it says about air pollution deaths in the 2019 Global Burden of Disease Survey, if one is too busy to open it oneself because one is too busy carrying on about Fukushima:

The top five risks for attributable deaths for females were high SBP (5·25 million [95% UI 4·49–6·00] deaths, or 20·3% [17·5–22·9] of all female deaths in 2019), dietary risks (3·48 million [2·78–4·37] deaths, or 13·5% [10·8–16·7] of all female deaths in 2019), high FPG (3·09 million [2·40–3·98] deaths, or 11·9% [9·4–15·3] of all female deaths in 2019), air pollution (2·92 million [2·53–3·33] deaths or 11·3% [10·0–12·6] of all female deaths in 2019), and high BMI (2·54 million [1·68–3·56] deaths or 9·8% [6·5–13·7] of all female deaths in 2019). For males, the top five risks differed slightly. In 2019, the leading Level 2 risk factor for attributable deaths globally in males was tobacco (smoked, second-hand, and chewing), which accounted for 6·56 million (95% UI 6·02–7·10) deaths (21·4% [20·5–22·3] of all male deaths in 2019), followed by high SBP, which accounted for 5·60 million (4·90–6·29) deaths (18·2% [16·2–20·1] of all male deaths in 2019). The third largest Level 2 risk factor for attributable deaths among males in 2019 was dietary risks (4·47 million [3·65–5·45] deaths, or 14·6% [12·0–17·6] of all male deaths in 2019) followed by air pollution (ambient particulate matter and ambient ozone pollution, accounting for 3·75 million [3·31–4·24] deaths (12·2% [11·0–13·4] of all male deaths in 2019), and then high FPG (3·14 million [2·70–4·34] deaths, or 11·1% [8·9–14·1] of all male deaths in 2019).

I keep this handy to point out how little antinukes care for stuff that matters, be it climate change, or the other effects of fossil fuel use, about which antinukes couldn't care less.

Here also, is something called a reference to the number of deaths caused by radiation at Fukushima, as opposed to the number of people killed by fear of radiation at the same event:

Comparison of mortality patterns after the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant radiation disaster and during the COVID-19 pandemic ( Motohiro Tsuboi et al 2022 J. Radiol. Prot. 42 031502)

It's open sourced, but an excerpt is relevant:

However, in the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant(FDNPP) accident, no direct health hazards due to radiation, such as acute radiation injury, were observed, while various indirect health effects were reported even in the acute phase [2, 3]. Major health effects are attributed to the initial emergency evacuation and displacement, deterioration of the shelter environment, evacuation from nursing homes, and psychological and social health effects. In addition, there were also the effects of medical collapse, where lives that could normally be saved by medical care could not be saved due to a lack of medical resources [4, 5]. It is known that these effects are particularly susceptible to the socially vulnerable [6].

.

I added the bold.

I also keep this text handy as well whenever people are carrying on insipidly about the big, big, big, big, big Bogeyman at Fukushima on their computers, powered by electricity that overwhelming comes from fossil fuels, with fossil fuel waste killing millions of people per year, roughly 80 to 90 million people since people began whining about Fukushima 13 years ago.

As for the commentary on how solar cells work, let me say this: I am used to contempt for science, in particular the laws of thermodynamics, among the "renewable energy will save us" crowd, although it's very clear after 50 years of such chanting, the world is not saved. Climate change is getting worse faster, and one reason is the trillions of dollars spent uselessly on solar and wind energy with the effect of entrenching the use of fossil fuels. It is antinuke fear and ignorance that has left the planet in flames. The evocation of wishful thinking about magical batteries is, as I often point out, an expression of contempt for the second law of thermodynamics, which is slightly arcane, but accessible to anyone of reasonable intelligence now that rational explanations exist, developed in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. It is unusual however, for antinukes, as badly educated as they generally are, to hold the first law of thermodynamics in contempt, as is happening in this exchange. It's a much simpler law.

As for nuclear energy:

Nuclear energy saves lives.

Here is something called a reference, coauthored by one of the world's leading (and famous) climate scientists, making the point, which I also keep handy:

Prevented Mortality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Historical and Projected Nuclear Power (Pushker A. Kharecha* and James E. Hansen Environ. Sci. Technol., 2013, 47 (9), pp 4889–4895)

The problem, as I see it, is a persistent refusal to have a simple sense of decency, for the elevation of dogma entrenching ignorance. I have seen here, among the antinukes, people citing the toxic idiot Helen Caldicott's unreferenced writings rather like right wing Christian Fundamentalists quoting the Book of Genesis in the Bible to explain the existence of the universe. One really doesn't want to believe that this sort of thing goes on, but it does.

No amount of information can change the rhetoric of a cult, not religious cults, not antinuke cults, not political cults like Trumpism, Nazism or the like. Cult thinking kills people, every time, all the time. The current case is no different.

Have a very pleasant Friday.