Remember Fukushima?

[MisterDeadeye 10+ year member]

 

[AlterEgo99 5,000+ posts]

I likes! //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/boink.gif.91933e72f927f2cefc79aff02573090c.gif

 

[jco1385 5,000+ posts]

i'm not saying i agree or disagree bro. i just don't believe that the industry (any industry) will say that what they are doing is harmful if it detracts from their profits. like when cigarettes wouldn't cause lung cancer. and now the oil is magically gone and the seafood is safe. i just don't believe everything that is told. i'm a skeptical person i guess.

 

[AlterEgo99 5,000+ posts]

i'm not saying i agree or disagree bro. i just don't believe that the industry (any industry) will say that what they are doing is harmful if it detracts from their profits. like when cigarettes wouldn't cause lung cancer. and now the oil is magically gone and the seafood is safe. i just don't believe everything that is told. i'm a skeptical person i guess.

Sounds reasonable to me...it is good to be skeptical. Trust me, I never believed cigarettes were good for you. I don't think the Gulf is out of the woods from that spill, but based on the initial reports when the well was still gushing one would think the entire Gulf was a cesspool and would never be the same. It will get better over time and 'ol Mother Nature will take care of most of it. Until then I am sure we have many gov't agencies taking close looks at any seafood coming out of that region. If you can light your shrimp on fire before you cook it, you probably shouldn't eat it. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/naughty.gif.94359f346c0f1259df8038d60b41863e.gif

 

[MisterDeadeye 10+ year member]

Sounds reasonable to me...it is good to be skeptical. Trust me, I never believed cigarettes were good for you. I don't think the Gulf is out of the woods from that spill, but based on the initial reports when the well was still gushing one would think the entire Gulf was a cesspool and would never be the same. It will get better over time and 'ol Mother Nature will take care of most of it. Until then I am sure we have many gov't agencies taking close looks at any seafood coming out of that region. If you can light your shrimp on fire before you cook it, you probably shouldn't eat it. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/naughty.gif.94359f346c0f1259df8038d60b41863e.gif

Look at Chernobyl. Even with the lasting radioactivity, plants and animals adapted relatively quickly; things work themselves out eventually.

 

[jco1385 5,000+ posts]

i don't eat the seafood. probably never will. no one knows what was in that shit they sprayed on the oil (corexit). and oyster beds are dying off. i'm not sure anyone has a 100% answer as to why the oysters and dolphins have been dying, but i'm not gullible enough to believe they can deem the seafood as 100% safe either.

 

[DonH 5,000+ posts]

nothing better than car audio enthusiasts turned energy experts bickering...

 

[MisterDeadeye 10+ year member]

nothing better than car audio enthusiasts turned energy experts bickering...

I know you can't read this, but I promise it says I'm an energy expert.

http://eurosib-eng.ru/files/editors/image/%D0%B0%D1%83%D0%B4%D0%B8%D1%82.jpg

 

[jco1385 5,000+ posts]

I know you can't read this, but I promise it says I'm an energy expert.
http://eurosib-eng.ru/files/editors/image/%D0%B0%D1%83%D0%B4%D0%B8%D1%82.jpg

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/bowdown.gif.b85b23b82970bd22fb6b549c3392f016.gif

 

[ahole-ic]

Article. I linked to it in my OP.
DailyTech - New Solar Cell Gives Its "110 Percent" in Efficiency

Oh. Yeah I read that. It is misleading but it is true. It is 110% efficient when you fudge the numbers. They are saying efficiency = # of photons in vs electrons out. That is horribly misleading. That's like saying 1 car that entered a collapsing tunnel = 1 person who escaped the collapse the other side. Each car has to contain at least 1 person. Some will be carrying more, yet your figure would show 100% "efficiency" no matter what. Solar cells right now are about 5% efficient and they render usually 15 watts per panel.

(here is an average panel, that larger panels would contain multiples of: http://www.amazon.com/Sunforce-50033-15-Watt-Solar-Charging/dp/B001RJOP5Y)

This means they wasted 285 watts of energy they collected. Increasing the solar panel 35% is simple. 15 watts x 1.35 = 20.25 watts or an overall efficiency of 6.75%. So you can see, this is all total bs to try to make you think it is viable. It isn't and won't be for a LONG LONG time. It has been proved that global warming is a hoax. It has been proved that we are not running out of oil and it is abundant here in the US. Oil is the most abundant and most efficient energy we have come up with besides nuclear. We should be using it.

 

[hispls 5,000+ posts]

Technology in plants like fukishima, chyrnobyl, etc. is not the same as we use here, nor are the containment buildings anywhere near the same. More modern reactor technologies (like pebble bed) make many of these types of disasters impossible.

Also, glad someone called BS on 14000ppl died in USA.

 

[MisterDeadeye 10+ year member]

Also, glad someone called BS on 14000ppl died in USA.

Me too. I posted that yesterday as soon as I found that article, before seeing if any of it was factual.

 

[tc300 10+ year member]

The world is gona end in 2012........ >

 

[tc300 10+ year member]

FYI 14,000 ppl is a drop in the bucket... Lol

 

[MisterDeadeye 10+ year member]

The world is gona end in 2012........ >

No.

FYI 14,000 ppl is a drop in the bucket... Lol

So if 14,000 people had died in the United States from Fukushima(eCrack disproved this, but I'm including an if), it wouldn't matter because there are several billion people on Earth?