So fusion is a controlled explosion, but fission isn’t?
Correct.

Help me out here, I’m struggling.

So fusion is a controlled explosion, but fission isn’t?

What’s the difference between a gas explosion and a hob for cooking on?

Uncontrolled / Controlled oxidation of ethane. Same process, differing levels of control.

Which isn’t really how it works.

Really ? I thought it was the exactly the same process. What’s the difference?

What Cougar said – Rock Climbing. Or Bouldering if you don’t like the risks/heights.

…..grim eh ?

Yes very. Does that mean they knew all along that it was that bad but were withholding information, or does it mean that everything is out of control, or did they really not comprehend the gravity of the situation in the first place?

One thing that struck me when reading some of the papers on Chernobyl was that they had 200,000 – 300,000 “liquidators” that went in to clean up the site. These poor chaps got some huge doses and significant increased cancer deaths. If Chernobyl happened any where other than the Soviet Union where would the liquidators come from ?

Maybe all pro-nuke advocates should be registered so they can be press ganged into service in the unlikely event we need some liquidators.

FFS !

Excellent valve logo alignment.
Plug those bars…..don’t want you doing a starship now do we.

That’s what BBC iPlayer is for.

There’s a link on that site “STUACC Does Wales”
Better hope those photos don’t make the press before the wedding !

Do you often praise numpties for their efforts?

Particularly laughable 😀

Buy one from a trusted source.
Or set your own certificate as trusted.

Go shoplift some Tesco’s wafer thin ham to cheer yourself up.

I thought there were bigger salmon than that ?

The whale I met was OK at addition, but multiplication was a no-no

However their baleen logic is impeccable.

250,000 is not “a small, identified group of people”. But yes they account for the majority (2,200) of the estimated deaths.

There are still 1,800 deaths outside this group. Still a figure that confirms “the claim thousands killed by Chernobyl”.

For reasons given above these estimates are likely to be conservative.

J_me – and so far, the probability that someone (outside of a small, identified group of people) will die from a cause which is in any way attributable to radiation exposure from Chernobyl is infinitesimally small

Eh ? I thought it was yourself that quoted the WHO report which estimated a total of up to 4000 deaths could eventually be attributed to the accident?

There is no statistical proof

Correct, there are only probabilities.

I think there is a LOT of conjecture on the death toll.

IAEA has a vested interest in the industry so there may be bias in their figures. And IIRC the WHO cannot publish any stats on Nukes etc without sign off from IAEA so I would expect the WHO’s stats to tie in with IAEA(I could be wrong though).

From what I’ve read a total of 1000+ deaths from Chernobyl is at the more conservative end of the spectrum.

Yes there are things outwith our control…..but isn’t the choice of what we use to generate our power from entirely within our control ?

4) How to cope with fluctuations in demand using nukes?

Nukes are probably the best choice of the non-renewables for bringing online at short notice to iron out fluctuations……doesn’t outweigh the disadvantages though IM(ill informed)O.

Not your fault RD….he’s wearing the wrong jersey 😯

….thats his race over!

Well it is now !

j me – it doesn’t even support his view

🙂 Well that’s beside the point….. 🙂

Can I also point out that earlier in the thread Zulu-11 dismissed a UNSCEAR report that contradicted his view on the health risks of Radon as not being peer reviewed etc. However he appears to be more than happy to cite a non peer reviewed WHO report that supports his viewpoint on the Chernobyl death toll.

Walked Ben Vorlich and Stuc A’Chroin and came back through Glen Ample a couple of months after the storm. It was a pretty impressive mess, I’ve not been up there recently though.

No. I need all my mental faculties to get the rotation correct.

Aye – AKA “A Dolph” guaranteed to floor you in one

T3 you say, are you in the BMI lounge? Go for a Long Island Ice Tea then !

The púca did it !

A large white russian ?

Edukator – In terms of climate change the hypothesis hasn’t changed in decades

I’m well aware of that….but in your own words “Good science includes the philosophy of doubt, accepting that the current best fit hypothesis is there to be challenged and a recognition of the limits of statistical techniques”. So the answer to Zulu-11s question is Yes. There is still some level of doubt, no matter how small, and we must accept that (however unlikely) someone may come up with evidence that disproves this.

Would that apply to anthropogenic climate change too?

Yes

Does the scientific consensus mean nothing?

No

Worth noting that it’s an anti-wind farm conservation organisation

Bit harsh there, as far as I know JMT have only objected to a handful of proposals (5 or 6 at most). I don’t think they are anti windfarm so long as they are planned/scaled/sited “appropriately”.

Zulu-11
Fill your boots……

Plenty in the reference section there for you to check out. A couple of journal articles do not make a fact !

Zulu-11 – Are you sure ?

Radon Linked to Cancer – UN Report

Are there documented increases in cancers in airline staff..

Yes I thought that was well known –
Increase breast cancer risk in cabin crew

What did he say about egg beaters ?

Go for State of The Art as a starter. It’s a collection of short stories. Even if it is just for the line “first person singular obtaining colloquial orgasm within a Caledonian sandwich” 🙂

D !