5 ms·

Radiation isn't magic. Several feet/meters of water are used as shielding for the fuel for a good reason. If you put an activated fuel rod inside of a lead lun

Radiation isn't magic. Several feet/meters of water are used as shielding for the fuel for a good reason. If you put an activated fuel rod inside of a lead lunch box, you will still die. You will now die from a lethal dose of bremsstrahlung. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bremsstrahlung https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bremsstrahlung If you interact with this material as an amateur without processes, robotics and safety, you will die. Period. You will also suffer from intense nausea and be unable to move before you die. Sharks with lasers are more realistic than this concern. The more plausible scenario is a "dirty bomb" that spreads depleted uranium particles everywhere and gives people cancer long-term. But there's an element of impracticality to this and there's a reason why it hasn't happened yet.

ViewTrick1002 3y ago
Even tiny amounts of radioactive waste are dangerous over time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goi%C3%A2nia_accident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goi%C3%A2nia_accident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kramatorsk_radiological_accident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kramatorsk_radiological_accide...
- roenxi 3y ago
  We have on-the-record cases of potatoes that have caused a similar number of deaths and injuries [0]. These incidents, while uncomfortable, are just not that concerning. You can kill yourself with damn near anything if you mishandle it badly enough. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solanine#Recorded_human_poisonings https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solanine#Recorded_human_poison...
lazide 3y ago
The issue they’re pointing out is that no one seriously considered terrorists flying airplanes into skyscrapers either, for similar reasons. Until they did it. After all, it’s very impractical getting a bunch of random terrorists training in flying well enough to do this without being caught. Let alone co-ordinating everything, getting through multiple layers of airport security, etc. And everyone ‘successful’ is going to die too. Who would do that? Historically, terrorists would just hijack a plane for attention and/or money and then let everyone go except for those stupid enough to fight them. Which is why the reaction onboard to the terrorists taking the planes was so muted, until a passenger on one of the planes heard the news of the first impact, and they realized they were in a very different situation than a hijacking for money. Not considering dirty bomb type issues a threat would likely be a mistake. Having a bunch of disposable idiots throw hot fuel rods into a water tanker truck, then driving to manhattan, seeding the water with cobalt-59, and letting the mess ‘sort itself out’ (or blowing the the truck up) certainly wouldn’t be hard compared to 9/11 in these scenarios, or likely kill more than a handful of terrorists. Depending on how well secured the fuel was anyway. It would create an absolutely terrific mess though. The only hard part here would be getting the hot fuel (and the idiots), everything else would be ‘COTS’. Which, like 9/11, would not be seen as ‘expensive’. This isn’t sharks with lasers territory.
- pas 3y ago
  SMRs don't mean they would be scattered around carelessly. They still need the whole steam boiler turbine toybox. And with security requirements they will most likely be put on a site like current NPPs.
  - lazide 3y ago
    A big selling point in the SMR space is they can be placed almost anywhere. It’s literally on the ‘brochure’.
    - pas 3y ago
      yes, and it might make sense, and we will see ... but. the real economics low-hanging fruit is to build those regular NPPs in increments, basically cheaper AND faster (which also means even cheaper). get real economies of scale, apply all of the last century's industrialization benefits on nuclear energy. (because current cost overruns are insane and mostly because of too-slow AND super-duper-artisanal (which means even slower) plant construction.
- fbdab103 3y ago
  >The issue they’re pointing out is that no one seriously considered terrorists flying airplanes into skyscrapers either, for similar reasons. Until they did it. Was literally an episode of the Lone Gunmen. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lone_Gunmen_(TV_series) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lone_Gunmen_(TV_series) In the pilot episode, which aired March 4, 2001 (exactly six months and one week prior to the September 11 attacks[5]), rogue members of the U.S. government remotely hijack an airliner flying to Boston, planning to crash it into the World Trade Center, and let anti-American terrorist groups take credit, to gain support for a profitable new war following the Cold War. The heroes ultimately override the controls, foiling the plot.
  - lazide 3y ago
    Are you claiming that counts as being seriously considered? Or just floating around? Clearly, Vince Gilligan is a member of the illuminati. Though the list of follow up episodes was a bit meh. Perhaps also telling? [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lone_Gunmen_(TV_series)#cite_note-11 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lone_Gunmen_(TV_series)#ci...], such as Episode 6 - "A man contacts the Lone Gunmen, believing his life has been stolen after being abducted by aliens. They end up getting caught in a love triangle involving a one-eyed stereo salesman, brainwashing, and a wrestling dwarf." Episode 10 - "Yves and Frohike go undercover as tango dancers to stop a man from selling government secrets." Or, the real 'telling the truth in the form of a lie'? Their last episode #13 - "The Lone Gunmen team up with Man in Black agent Morris Fletcher to find Yves. What they uncover is Romeo-61, a secret government organization responsible for decades of major incidents." Was Vince picking up top-secret communications in his fillings (maybe even subconsciously) and ended up telling too much? Or a SG-1 style 'early disclosure'/'disinfo' campaign? Or false-false flag? Or coincidence? Or reaction to some actual gov't preparatory 'conspiracy theory' poisoning the well? The world may never know. /s

ViewTrick1002 3y ago

Even tiny amounts of radioactive waste are dangerous over time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goi%C3%A2nia_accident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goi%C3%A2nia_accident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kramatorsk_radiological_accident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kramatorsk_radiological_accide...

roenxi 3y ago
We have on-the-record cases of potatoes that have caused a similar number of deaths and injuries [0]. These incidents, while uncomfortable, are just not that concerning. You can kill yourself with damn near anything if you mishandle it badly enough. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solanine#Recorded_human_poisonings https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solanine#Recorded_human_poison...

lazide 3y ago

The issue they’re pointing out is that no one seriously considered terrorists flying airplanes into skyscrapers either, for similar reasons. Until they did it. After all, it’s very impractical getting a bunch of random terrorists training in flying well enough to do this without being caught. Let alone co-ordinating everything, getting through multiple layers of airport security, etc. And everyone ‘successful’ is going to die too. Who would do that? Historically, terrorists would just hijack a plane for attention and/or money and then let everyone go except for those stupid enough to fight them. Which is why the reaction onboard to the terrorists taking the planes was so muted, until a passenger on one of the planes heard the news of the first impact, and they realized they were in a very different situation than a hijacking for money. Not considering dirty bomb type issues a threat would likely be a mistake. Having a bunch of disposable idiots throw hot fuel rods into a water tanker truck, then driving to manhattan, seeding the water with cobalt-59, and letting the mess ‘sort itself out’ (or blowing the the truck up) certainly wouldn’t be hard compared to 9/11 in these scenarios, or likely kill more than a handful of terrorists. Depending on how well secured the fuel was anyway. It would create an absolutely terrific mess though. The only hard part here would be getting the hot fuel (and the idiots), everything else would be ‘COTS’. Which, like 9/11, would not be seen as ‘expensive’. This isn’t sharks with lasers territory.

pas 3y ago
SMRs don't mean they would be scattered around carelessly. They still need the whole steam boiler turbine toybox. And with security requirements they will most likely be put on a site like current NPPs.
- lazide 3y ago
  A big selling point in the SMR space is they can be placed almost anywhere. It’s literally on the ‘brochure’.
  - pas 3y ago
    yes, and it might make sense, and we will see ... but. the real economics low-hanging fruit is to build those regular NPPs in increments, basically cheaper AND faster (which also means even cheaper). get real economies of scale, apply all of the last century's industrialization benefits on nuclear energy. (because current cost overruns are insane and mostly because of too-slow AND super-duper-artisanal (which means even slower) plant construction.
fbdab103 3y ago
>The issue they’re pointing out is that no one seriously considered terrorists flying airplanes into skyscrapers either, for similar reasons. Until they did it. Was literally an episode of the Lone Gunmen. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lone_Gunmen_(TV_series) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lone_Gunmen_(TV_series) In the pilot episode, which aired March 4, 2001 (exactly six months and one week prior to the September 11 attacks[5]), rogue members of the U.S. government remotely hijack an airliner flying to Boston, planning to crash it into the World Trade Center, and let anti-American terrorist groups take credit, to gain support for a profitable new war following the Cold War. The heroes ultimately override the controls, foiling the plot.
- lazide 3y ago
  Are you claiming that counts as being seriously considered? Or just floating around? Clearly, Vince Gilligan is a member of the illuminati. Though the list of follow up episodes was a bit meh. Perhaps also telling? [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lone_Gunmen_(TV_series)#cite_note-11 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lone_Gunmen_(TV_series)#ci...], such as Episode 6 - "A man contacts the Lone Gunmen, believing his life has been stolen after being abducted by aliens. They end up getting caught in a love triangle involving a one-eyed stereo salesman, brainwashing, and a wrestling dwarf." Episode 10 - "Yves and Frohike go undercover as tango dancers to stop a man from selling government secrets." Or, the real 'telling the truth in the form of a lie'? Their last episode #13 - "The Lone Gunmen team up with Man in Black agent Morris Fletcher to find Yves. What they uncover is Romeo-61, a secret government organization responsible for decades of major incidents." Was Vince picking up top-secret communications in his fillings (maybe even subconsciously) and ended up telling too much? Or a SG-1 style 'early disclosure'/'disinfo' campaign? Or false-false flag? Or coincidence? Or reaction to some actual gov't preparatory 'conspiracy theory' poisoning the well? The world may never know. /s