Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: A bit off topic...Bernard Languillier  (Read 14387 times)
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #60 on: April 12, 2011, 03:03:43 AM »
ReplyReply

feppe, are you in danger of being caught wearing blinkers?

Rob C
Logged

BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7728



WWW
« Reply #61 on: April 12, 2011, 05:08:34 AM »
ReplyReply

I am mostly still in favor of Nuclear power but I don't believe it makes sense to let corporations operate reactors with profitability as a key concern.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2909

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #62 on: April 12, 2011, 05:13:25 AM »
ReplyReply

feppe, are you in danger of being caught wearing blinkers?

Rob C

If by "blinkers" you mean "blinders," I like the new, mangled English Wink

In good ol' debate fashion go ahead and attack the messenger, not the message. I'm the one providing much-needed perspective with cited information, while many others (including you) are just passionately regurgitating media's anti-nuclear hysteria.

It is you, sir, who's wearing the blinders.
Logged

UlfKrentz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 306


WWW
« Reply #63 on: April 12, 2011, 06:45:35 AM »
ReplyReply

If by "blinkers" you mean "blinders," I like the new, mangled English Wink

In good ol' debate fashion go ahead and attack the messenger, not the message. I'm the one providing much-needed perspective with cited information, while many others (including you) are just passionately regurgitating media's anti-nuclear hysteria.

It is you, sir, who's wearing the blinders.

Well, your latest information was copublished by the IAEA, which might be a bit biased? It is easy to find different conclusions regarding Chernobyl from various authors with profound knowledge. I did not attack you, but I have to admit that I donīt understand your point of view and your argumentation. Coal has its specific problems, but this has nothing to do with the topic. The radiation is serious, the accident in Fukushima was set to level 7 on the international scale now and the whole thing is still not at end. I am far from hysteria and I donīt try to change your opinion.
« Last Edit: April 12, 2011, 06:49:27 AM by UlfKrentz » Logged
Voltman
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 62


« Reply #64 on: April 12, 2011, 07:57:17 AM »
ReplyReply

... but the most significant disaster was not the nuclear incident, nor the quake, but the Tsunami?
Dick,

Yes - the aftermath of the tsunami itself is simply beyond words, and just by visual observation gives you trauma even as an outsider who didn't experience its initial wrath. There are still 15,000 souls missing - which horrifically gnaws at the back of everyone's minds, as well as 100,000s of displaced folks. The nuclear crisis though, no matter what the armchair pundits say, is quite a real and ongoing threat to Japan, and moreover to the economy and socio-psychological stability which is so vital to our recovery. I spent 21 years in the US Navy as a submariner, living and working literally alongside a nuclear reactor, and working with nuclear weapons - I'm not afraid of radiation if its managed properly, and well know its limits and hazards. But even with all my experience I'm still quite fearful of the outcome and now strongly question at least Japan's safe management of nuclear power moving forward. And for those skeptics - yes its very prudent to wear a dosimeter here, Marc is quite fortunate to have access to one. Where the Fukushima Daiichi crisis will lead we won't know for many months to come, in the meantime its a bit tedious having to watch webcams and outside radiological monitoring in the absence of being given real data and status from TEPCO and the Government. As for the quakes - those are also getting tiring, we've had at least 5 major aftershocks just today - the strongest event to happen in Tokyo since 1923 occurred this morning. On a positive note I'm somewhat reassured by the quake resistant engineering put into the infrastructure, and have more faith than ever before in the integrity of buildings, roads, etc., and even my creaky 50 year old house. Its also oddly intriguing to be presented with unique challenges like how to store 200 liters of water (in case the tap water is contaminated with Iodine and Cesium again) in a manner which can survive the ongoing jolts and wobbles of the earthquakes, let alone trying to find out the estimated plume of volcanic ash Mt. Fuji would produce should it somehow be seismically triggered into an eruption (the 4th threat vector not mentioned in foreign media). In the end though we're all here just trying to resume normal lives, and no matter if a swarm of locusts arrive tomorrow - we're at least alive and thriving - unlike the dead and missing to the North of us as a result of the tsunami.

Today I was supposed to meet Marc here in Tokyo for the first time but had to cancel due to the aftershock - but hopefully will soon. Then I can sit with someone and discuss things like IQ180s, WRS, Hartblei Cams, and learn more about photography, while taking a break from our triad of demon disasters. Would be great if Bernard could join as well!

Also in a way related to photography - whenever disaster happens (hurricane, tsunami, fire, whatever) people always say the most precious valuables lost were photographs. We're seeing that here as well. I'm considering somehow, when the time is appropriate, to use my new IQ and 645DF to shoot free portraits for displaced people and families. I've never shot portraiture before, but want to give it a go - hope the LL forums can help when the time comes to do so! Speaking of which has anyone heard a firm shipping date for IQ backs?

--Brett

P.S. - if people really want to contribute to Japan in a positive manner - go out and buy a Japanese camera or a lens, or a bottle of sake!!
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7234


WWW
« Reply #65 on: April 12, 2011, 08:18:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for saying a lot of good things!

Erik

Dick,

Yes - the aftermath of the tsunami itself is simply beyond words, and just by visual observation gives you trauma even as an outsider who didn't experience its initial wrath. There are still 15,000 souls missing - which horrifically gnaws at the back of everyone's minds, as well as 100,000s of displaced folks. The nuclear crisis though, no matter what the armchair pundits say, is quite a real and ongoing threat to Japan, and moreover to the economy and socio-psychological stability which is so vital to our recovery. I spent 21 years in the US Navy as a submariner, living and working literally alongside a nuclear reactor, and working with nuclear weapons - I'm not afraid of radiation if its managed properly, and well know its limits and hazards. But even with all my experience I'm still quite fearful of the outcome and now strongly question at least Japan's safe management of nuclear power moving forward. And for those skeptics - yes its very prudent to wear a dosimeter here, Marc is quite fortunate to have access to one. Where the Fukushima Daiichi crisis will lead we won't know for many months to come, in the meantime its a bit tedious having to watch webcams and outside radiological monitoring in the absence of being given real data and status from TEPCO and the Government. As for the quakes - those are also getting tiring, we've had at least 5 major aftershocks just today - the strongest event to happen in Tokyo since 1923 occurred this morning. On a positive note I'm somewhat reassured by the quake resistant engineering put into the infrastructure, and have more faith than ever before in the integrity of buildings, roads, etc., and even my creaky 50 year old house. Its also oddly intriguing to be presented with unique challenges like how to store 200 liters of water (in case the tap water is contaminated with Iodine and Cesium again) in a manner which can survive the ongoing jolts and wobbles of the earthquakes, let alone trying to find out the estimated plume of volcanic ash Mt. Fuji would produce should it somehow be seismically triggered into an eruption (the 4th threat vector not mentioned in foreign media). In the end though we're all here just trying to resume normal lives, and no matter if a swarm of locusts arrive tomorrow - we're at least alive and thriving - unlike the dead and missing to the North of us as a result of the tsunami.

Today I was supposed to meet Marc here in Tokyo for the first time but had to cancel due to the aftershock - but hopefully will soon. Then I can sit with someone and discuss things like IQ180s, WRS, Hartblei Cams, and learn more about photography, while taking a break from our triad of demon disasters. Would be great if Bernard could join as well!

Also in a way related to photography - whenever disaster happens (hurricane, tsunami, fire, whatever) people always say the most precious valuables lost were photographs. We're seeing that here as well. I'm considering somehow, when the time is appropriate, to use my new IQ and 645DF to shoot free portraits for displaced people and families. I've never shot portraiture before, but want to give it a go - hope the LL forums can help when the time comes to do so! Speaking of which has anyone heard a firm shipping date for IQ backs?

--Brett

P.S. - if people really want to contribute to Japan in a positive manner - go out and buy a Japanese camera or a lens, or a bottle of sake!!
Logged

feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2909

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #66 on: April 12, 2011, 01:28:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Well, your latest information was copublished by the IAEA, which might be a bit biased? It is easy to find different conclusions regarding Chernobyl from various authors with profound knowledge. I did not attack you, but I have to admit that I donīt understand your point of view and your argumentation. Coal has its specific problems, but this has nothing to do with the topic. The radiation is serious, the accident in Fukushima was set to level 7 on the international scale now and the whole thing is still not at end. I am far from hysteria and I donīt try to change your opinion.

The report is co-authored by IAEA, WHO and UNDP. If you have sources which you deem more reliable, I'm all ears.

I was referring to Rob in my comment about ad hominems.

I've been explicit about my point of view from the beginning: Fukushima nuclear disaster gets wildly disproportionate mindshare compared to the death and destruction caused by the earthquake and tsunami (arresting footage of what the tsunami did to an entire city within minutes).

In the big picture, the extremely limited risk posed by nuclear power is dwarfed by the widespread death and destruction caused by other power-production methods, namely coal mining and burning.

We (humanity) would be better served with rational discourse based on facts, rather than a hysteria fuelled by clueless journalists, lobbies pushing their agenda at all costs, and ignorance. I know it's perhaps too much to ask in the world of the 5-second soundbite and Scare-Of-The-Week, but unlike some here I'm not a misanthrope and have hope that reason triumphs in the end.

I'm hoping Olympus releases a serious MFT body soon to replace my E-PL1 so I'll have a great excuse to contribute to their recovery Smiley
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #67 on: April 12, 2011, 02:55:52 PM »
ReplyReply

If by "blinkers" you mean "blinders," I like the new, mangled English Wink

In good ol' debate fashion go ahead and attack the messenger, not the message. I'm the one providing much-needed perspective with cited information, while many others (including you) are just passionately regurgitating media's anti-nuclear hysteria.

It is you, sir, who's wearing the blinders.



Almost touché but not quite!

Check out the Concise Oxford English Dictionary; I do mean blinkers as in worn by Trigger to keep him unaware of what's going down amongst the injuns.

And no, I'm not consumed by 'media frenzy' either: just using my own basic knowledge of school physics, common sense and a little observation thrown in for good measure.

;-)

Rob C
Logged

feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2909

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #68 on: April 12, 2011, 03:23:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Almost touché but not quite!

Check out the Concise Oxford English Dictionary; I do mean blinkers as in worn by Trigger to keep him unaware of what's going down amongst the injuns.

Silly Brits with their silly English Tongue
Logged

BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7728



WWW
« Reply #69 on: April 12, 2011, 06:44:46 PM »
ReplyReply

Today I was supposed to meet Marc here in Tokyo for the first time but had to cancel due to the aftershock - but hopefully will soon. Then I can sit with someone and discuss things like IQ180s, WRS, Hartblei Cams, and learn more about photography, while taking a break from our triad of demon disasters. Would be great if Bernard could join as well!

Sure, please send me a PM once the place and time are known. Smiley

I will probably not be around during the coming weekends due to an opportunity to do some bits of voluntary work up North though.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5484



WWW
« Reply #70 on: April 12, 2011, 06:50:00 PM »
ReplyReply

... Check out the Concise Oxford English Dictionary; I do mean blinkers as in worn by Trigger to keep him unaware of what's going down amongst the injuns...

Yet another advantage for a Mac: a simple rightclick over the word and the pop-up dictionary would say this:


"...( blinkers) another term for blinders...."

 Smiley
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Kumar
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 652


WWW
« Reply #71 on: April 12, 2011, 08:43:00 PM »
ReplyReply

I do not know enough about nuclear plants or radiation. Hence, without comment:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/apr/11/nuclear-apologists-radiation

Kumar
Logged

NikoJorj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1063


WWW
« Reply #72 on: April 13, 2011, 02:21:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Just to focus on where the debate really is : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_no-threshold_model sums it quite decently.

In a few words, life is drown in continuous low levels of radiation since the beginning of it and did survive, so one may bring the hypothesis that these levels of radiation (such as the ones being measured outside the Fukushima NPP) are not harmful.
Some studies actually go towards they being beneficial, but in any cases, we're talking about such tiny effects that statistics are inconclusive.
Logged

Nicolas from Grenoble
A small gallery
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #73 on: April 13, 2011, 03:01:14 AM »
ReplyReply


Yet another advantage for a Mac: a simple rightclick over the word and the pop-up dictionary would say this:


"...( blinkers) another term for blinders...."

 Smiley




Reference, again, to the COED would show this: (blinders) North American blinkers on a horse's bridle.

Which only shows up the Mac's North American heritage, nothing more. Of course, there is always the perverse argument that Keith Richards is a more genuine r'n'r guitar player than Chuck Berry, but you can probably discount that for yourself... I'd definitely give the native the edge, especially in the case of the Scottish bagpipe players, where the French had an even better edge for them all, auld alliances notwithstanding.

Oh the tangled web.

Regarding my ailing tv: today it switched on for the news, but in glorious black and white.

Rob C
Logged

julius0377
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 56


« Reply #74 on: April 13, 2011, 07:07:56 AM »
ReplyReply

The problem is not so much the nuclear power plants, but the waste storage. Massive amounts of highly radioactive nuclear waste is produces every day, and remains harmful for about 100000 years. How do you store this, and where.

The solution most countries implement so far is storage above ground. But lets say a tsunami, earthquake, war or something entirely different hits such a storage facility?

How do we produce containers that can keep the waste inside for such a time span, man has not produced anything with anything close to this longevity... metal containers corrcode, plastics are not suited, concrete and lead erodes, etc...

I recommend wathing Michael Madsen film Into Eternity, about nuclear waste storage in Finland. It is an eye opener to the problem we are creating for ourselves with nuclear waste. Here is a link to wikipedia about the film: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Into_Eternity_(film)

Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #75 on: April 13, 2011, 10:27:37 AM »
ReplyReply

For what it's worth, my opinion is that it (nuke) is more than a step too far into a technology that was never thought through because too many vested interests were waving green flags. Or, if it had been thought through, the same flags smothered the doubters. 'Twas ever thus, from unnecessary lead in petrol to genetically modified crops: big bucks are the only real motivation behind the implementation.

Solution? Birth control and vote control. If you can't prove you can think, then you shouldn't have a vote; if your prick is overactive it should be tethered to the side of your leg, or, preferrably, kept in your pocket in a plastic envelope just for old time's sake.

Of course, it all comes down to the concept of family, marriage and responsibility, but with these values mocked by the new intelligentsia, what hope for the rest of mankind? None; it'll sink and drown in its own moral swill. Everything ends in a state of corruption.

Rob C
Logged

feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2909

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #76 on: April 13, 2011, 11:18:33 AM »
ReplyReply

The problem is not so much the nuclear power plants, but the waste storage. Massive amounts of highly radioactive nuclear waste is produces every day, and remains harmful for about 100000 years. How do you store this, and where.

The solution most countries implement so far is storage above ground. But lets say a tsunami, earthquake, war or something entirely different hits such a storage facility?

That is indeed one of the most difficult things to solve. But the solution exists for future reactors: breeder reactor.

From the article:
Quote
a normal reactor consumes less than 1% of the natural uranium that begins the fuel cycle, while a breeder can burn almost all of it (minus re-processing losses), also generating less waste for equal amounts of energy[1]. Breeders can be designed to use thorium, which is more abundant than uranium

Unfortunately these types of reactors don't receive the R&D funding they deserve. Fusion power would probably be even more efficient, safer and cleaner, but it is in its infancy, and even with massive R&d spending wouldn't be able to meet the accelerating growth in power demand of China, India, Brazil and other emerging countries which are quickly going middle-class and urbanizing.
Logged

feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2909

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #77 on: April 13, 2011, 11:19:49 AM »
ReplyReply

Solution? Birth control and vote control. If you can't prove you can think, then you shouldn't have a vote; if your prick is overactive it should be tethered to the side of your leg, or, preferrably, kept in your pocket in a plastic envelope just for old time's sake.

Would you like to propose that to the mom in developing world whose only safety net in old age is that one of her children survives into adulthood and earns enough to support her? Or perhaps we should adopt China's one child policy?

Affluence and closely related education level are potent at limiting birth rate, and probably the only widely ethically acceptable solutions. But both require time and energy (electricity), and lots of it.
Logged

fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #78 on: April 13, 2011, 11:29:42 AM »
ReplyReply

If we (humanity) are not capable to resolve very soon our energetic issues, our demography, our economy based on fast profits and speculation, the damages we inflict to our environement and the other alive creatures; if we can't managed to eradicate those absurd religious, racial, patriotical concepts and can't live in harmony with our differences, if we insist in exploiting 80% of the population to manage a high standart of living for the 20%, standart that's based only into more profit regardless of the damages for the planet and our proper future generation; this attempt (humanity) will simply not survive and all the survivor creatures of this planet will then be releived from the plague. 
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #79 on: April 13, 2011, 11:50:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Would you like to propose that to the mom in developing world whose only safety net in old age is that one of her children survives into adulthood and earns enough to support her? Or perhaps we should adopt China's one child policy? Affluence and closely related education level are potent at limiting birth rate, and probably the only widely ethically acceptable solutions. But both require time and energy (electricity), and lots of it.


I'm not sure it works like that, feppe; from personal observation by dint of living in India, begging and the mutilation of babes to make them more convincingly effective props is hardly any route to a satisfactory endgame. Worse, it adds layer upon layer of responsibility onto a state that can either choose to ignore it or, should it feel obliged to act, can find itself bankrupt from the experience. I would be surprised to learn that the legions of street kids have any old relative whom they are going to help in dotage...

Regarding the Chinese model, at least one has to accept that they have faced the problem with some action; all we do in the west is expand the health care service ever wider to include the world's strays, thus diluting what would otherwise be available for our own desperate.

The mess is getting greater all the time.

You see it reflected in the refusal to accept reductions in wages, benefits or anything else. Everybody says the problems are huge, but nobody is willing to accept that we all have to be part of the solution, and I hardly exclude myself from the myopia as I complain as loudly as the next guy at the zero interest that the fruit of a life of careful living now provides.

My mother had to spend the last few years of her life in a retirement home; do you imagine she was happy that it cost her, personally, many thousands of pounds for what most of her fellow residents were getting gratis? If you want morality, it's difficult to find; on the other hand, irony is everywhere, so maybe, on balance, that's all right then...

Rob C
Logged

Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad