Every nuclear explosion since 1945

[Creed of Heresy]

Long-lasting effects on this planet? What, you think this planet hasn't been subjected to a ridiculous amount of radiation over the last few billion years? The amount of radiation that bombards this planet every day is more than all of the nukes we've ever detonated put together. Even in places like Chernobyl, where the entire place is a glowzone, wildlife and plantlife continues to thrive. Besides, we control nuclear power every day, and you know what? We should control MORE of it. Yeah, I fucking said it, this entire fucking planet should be powered by nuclear power plants, and I mean the new ones. Solar panels are too expensive, difficult, and unreliable. Wind farms require way too much space and are unreliable. Hydro-electric plants require specific geological characteristics and are expensive.

And you know what we could do with all that nuclear waste? BURY IT IN THE FUCKING DESERT. You know, that ENORMOUS fucking desert we have in the US? The Mojave? Where fucking nothing lives? Yeah, they had an idea to build a giant-ass tunnel that was lead-lined and concrete-sealed. No lead leaking into the ground, and no radiation getting into it either, and it would have enough space to take on storage of all our nuclear waste indefinitely.

It got axed because people like you kept whining about nuclear power out of ignorance of what its potential truly is. You see only the destructive potential; I see the solution to ALL of our energy problems far into the future.

Worse comes to worst? Load the fucking plutonium onto a massive rocket ship and launch it into deep space whenever you need to get rid of it in a pinch. Or better yet the sun. Problem fucking solved.

[Autumnlicious]

Solar panels are too expensive, difficult, and unreliable.

Absolute BULLSHIT.

Solar panels are quite reliable. Why do you think they're fucking used IN SPACE?

Expensive and difficult, yes. However, expensive has been falling like a rock due to Chinese photovoltaic manufacturing (that's what killed Solyndra before it could start -- idiots thought the Chinese silicon shortage would last for years, China thought otherwise). Difficulty is a relative concept -- Elon Musk's SolarCity is yet another entrant to an increasingly crowded field of "make it easy" one stop solar shops.

Wind farms require way too much space and are unreliable.

You like the term 'unreliable' a lot. I do not think it means what you think it means. We'll need to qualify that.

Unreliable as in power generation? It depends on aspects of the location -- South Point in Hawaii, for example, has a near constant power output for it's collection of turbines because the wind never stops there. In fact, the turbines are in more danger of spinning too fast (which would stress the drive shaft and fracture, creating an impromptu frag grenade) and have to be damped/replaced with carbon fiber.

Way too much space -- indeed. But then again, the power needs of a location matter. A local power source and short transmission lines gives you much more bang for your buck than any amount of high voltage, long distance transmission lines ever will give from however powerful your distant power plant is (you know, due to losses, maintenance costs, etc)...


So wind does fit some niche areas well -- we do have certain areas that might do well to be exploited as wind farms (because there's nothing else there). Would you be against such a solution? It makes little sense to rely entirely on one and only one type of power generation when you have the world of motion at your finger tips.

Hydro-electric plants require specific geological characteristics and are expensive.

Oh pul-eeze. Now this has gone stupid. You're just arbitrarily targeting every alternative energy source out of spite.

"Require specific geological characteristics"???

Nigga, that is a FUCKING DAM. Of course if fucking "require specific geological characteristics"! While we're at it, water is wet and Microsoft is stupid.

If the best you can argue that "X is bad because it needs something that is endemic to the definition of X", you've messed up.

And you know what we could do with all that nuclear waste? BURY IT IN THE FUCKING DESERT.

We tried to do that. In Nevada. Remember?

The Nevadans HATED it.

The project is widely opposed in Nevada and is a hotly debated national topic. A two-thirds majority of Nevadans feel it is unfair for their state to have to store nuclear waste when there are no nuclear power plants in Nevada.[26] Many Nevadans' opposition stemmed from the so-called "Screw Nevada Bill," the 1987 legislation halting study of Hanford and Texas as potential sites for the waste before conclusions could be met.[26] However, the local county in which the proposed facility is located, Nye County, supports the development of the repository.

Worse comes to worst? Load the fucking plutonium onto a massive rocket ship and launch it into deep space whenever you need to get rid of it in a pinch. Or better yet the sun. Problem fucking solved.

You do know that the HEAVIER the object, that HARDER it is to launch. As in "magnitudes more expensive and difficult".

Problem "solved" indeed.

Might as well be taking about stepping onto my exotic matter powered Alcubierre drive vessel and warping off to Alpha Centauri!

[Anomalocaris]

Coincidentally ,there was a doco last night called "World's Biggest Bomb". In part,it dealt with Soviet HIGH ALTITUDE Soviet nuclear testing in 1961. The radioactive clouds drifted for HUNDREDS of miles and effected many thousands.


It's a National Geographic film so should be available elsewhere on line if the link below doesn't work.


http://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/video/224...ggest-Bomb

Actually, megaton for megaton, the soviet 50 MT "Czar Bomba", the largest bomb ever tested, was by some very considerable margin the cleanest hydrogen bomb ever air tested.

The actual weopon was capable of twice the yield released during the test. The test bomb was specifically "de-tuned" to reduce fallout to a very minimum.

---

America sure likes blowing shit up.

1,000 nuclear tests?

You can imagine after test #4 or something, them saying "yep, it explodes", and somebody else saying "let's juuuuust try one more, you know, just to make sure"

it is true that simple but well engineered fission bombs are very reliable. No country except north Korea have ever contrive to screw up their first fission bomb test.

However, fusion weapons have a lot of tunable parameters, and fusion weapons can definitely screw up. America's first fusion bomb was so screwed up the physicists involved got its yield forecast wrong by a factor of eight.

None of the current generation of weapons fielded by US, Russia, Britain, France and China are simple explosive devices. They are all highly optimized weopons designed to be light, have adjustable explosive power, tunable initial neutron burst, and adjustable fallout to suite the type of target they are deployed against, and conserve self-decaying fusion material to achieve maximum shelf life.

These complex designs needs to be tested to verify they work as intended.

Furthermore, fusion weapons have a shelf life due to radioactive decay of the fusion material. As they degrade their performance becomes difficult to model. So if no new weapons and fusion and fission materials are being made, existing stockpile needs to be continuously sample tested to determine their explosive characteristics as the degrade.

[Angrboda]

[Anomalocaris]

Actually, solar power and wind power are unreliable, not because of the technology, but because of the caprices of clouds and variability of wind.

To integrate large amounts of solar and wind power into a power grid is indeed one hell of a problem, because while solar power and wind power are variable over the time scale of a minute or two, the loads are not, so you require large capacities of particular types of hydro electric or fossil fuel powered generating stations to do nothing but vary its own output in inverse of the outputs of wind and solar.

These "ancillary service" generators are expensive, inefficient, and very polluting. This is why most grids can't absorb more than 35% or so of solar and wind. Any higher, and you will need to run so many ancillary servic stations that you will cancel out the gains in Green house gas reduction.

Not so with nuclear power. Nuclear power is he most reliable power source besides geothermal. Nuclear power plants generates a constant level of power day in and day out, doesn't have to ramp down except once every 18 month. For simplicity and efficient grid control, nothing except geothermal and a few rare year round hydros can match nuclear.

[Welsh cake]

Long-lasting effects on this planet? What, you think this planet hasn't been subjected to a ridiculous amount of radiation over the last few billion years? The amount of radiation that bombards this planet every day is more than all of the nukes we've ever detonated put together.

Yeah let's dump more fuel onto the fire why don't we? ;D

Even in places like Chernobyl, where the entire place is a glowzone, wildlife and plantlife continues to thrive.

Do you want to live there? Where pieces and fragments of the no.4 reactor not properly disposed still lie a few inches beneath sand and dirt? ^^

Besides, we control nuclear power every day, and you know what? We should control MORE of it. Yeah, I fucking said it, this entire fucking planet should be powered by nuclear power plants, and I mean the new ones.

You are the pride of France I'm sure. =] Meanwhile, we're shutting down these power stations and scrapping plans to build new ones.

Solar panels are too expensive, difficult, and unreliable. Wind farms require way too much space and are unreliable. Hydro-electric plants require specific geological characteristics and are expensive.

Nuclear power is also expensive. What is your point?

And you know what we could do with all that nuclear waste? BURY IT IN THE FUCKING DESERT.

The Muslim extremists like this plan of yours.

It got axed because people like you kept whining about nuclear power out of ignorance of what its potential truly is.

I'm pretty confident it had more to do with a shortage of money, rather than whiny little insignificant ants like me complaining.

Worse comes to worst? Load the fucking plutonium onto a massive rocket ship and launch it into deep space whenever you need to get rid of it in a pinch. Or better yet the sun. Problem fucking solved.

Duh... we have had an anomaly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEFNjL86y9c

[Anomalocaris]

Actually, nuclear power is cheaper than wind or solar right now. Wind and particularly solar will get cheaper, but nuclear has a good deal of potential to get cheaper too. The main thing against nuclear power right now is the new found abundance of cheap natural gas thanks to hydraulic fracturing.

At present there is no prospect of unclear competing with natural gas from a fundamental cost point of view.

[Epimethean]

Have fracking techniques improved enough not to cause chemical contamination issues yet?

[Napoléon]

My country wins. USA! USA!

Yes, the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are certainly a right bunch of losers. [/sarcasm]

[Reforged]

Why the hell is *France* going all out on nuclear testing?