OT, never forget, tschernobyl is overall, all over the world

Damit wuerde ich wirklich keine Probleme haben Nicht alle hier (als Du grade siehst) koennen nur ihre Muttersprache und Englisch

Ich erwarte Deinen ersten Sachlichen post in deutschen

@spuint (budiet po hłangielsku, coby ludzie nie narzekali)
From economical point of view construction of Nuclear Power Plants is as profitable as that of modern conventional plants is. Zarnowiec plant was completed in 80% so the money spent on it was simply wasted- only because of protesters (You cannot say, that spednding $250 millon and stopping the investition $40M before completion, isn't a waste... can You?). I strongly believe, that decission was one of biggest errors of our govt. As for plant safety - the Zarnowiec power plant design was more modern than 75% of nuclear power plants in U.S.A. are today. Arguments stating, that Tschenobyl disaster could repeat itself in Zarnowiec, are idiotic (simply because Czernobyl power plant was late 1940's RMBK design and Zarnowiec was 1980's PWR... but what can I say... ignorants prefer to stay ignorant- learning new stuff seems to hurt'em).

 

@spuint - czechoslovakia paid USSR for storing radioactive waste - after 1991 they refused to fulfil obligation tho; all nuclear waste was in Slovakia at the moment.. so it was transfered back to czech rep. where it is now. We never exported any nuclear waste (at least officially).

There are better sources of energy tho. Only big companies on energetical field don't like them-- they are less profitable . Such example could be wind chimneys - big tall one -- opened at the bottom.. on very hot place.. changes of temperature up and near to surface makes air flowing up through it - turbine inside.. voila ; same principle like "meluzina"

ad cost and wastes of money in building nuclear power plants.. well temelin case is good example of it. It was 80% completed in 1989. It should be completed in 1992,, then 1995 .. then 1996,,, then 1999.. then.. well it is completed now.. the cost were increasing and increasing and increasing(rest 20% became 80% actually) -- mainly in order to make it safe. Constant protests were held -- especially in Austria . From ecological point of view (in specific situation in czech rep.), Temelin was the only way - arguments of so-called ecological activits were nonsenses and short-minded. On the other hand,, we have 2 nuclear plants and we have no plan what to do with waste.. .
To say.. it wasn't the state who paid the costs.. it was CEZ (company - but under state's control).

 

no jo, mosche, to muzes, ale my ti budeme rozumet, zatimco ty nam rozumis asi tak hovno

 

theres something which is not included in such counts - utilization of the products of nuclear plant;
u know how big are these? i can tell u that for 30 years of working nuclear plant utilization costs 5 times more than a power plant;
of course u can just pump the mud into the lake for example, like it was done (!!) before; and probably it was more destructive than catastrophe at Czernobyl itself;

i cant tell how much money was wasted there, but i dont believe that gov has listened to ppl and decided to waste such a big amount; actually we have a hydroplant in zarnowiec by now (which is more like a battery than a power plant), and in the place of not finished nuclear plant are some industry corporations, so i assume not all money was wasted after all;

i assume that was not the reason, ignorant is thinkin that only disaster can be caused by explosion in the power plant;

 

thats what im talkin about,
from the other hand, there was a nuclear power plant in germany, totally finished, and never used, dunno neither its name nor location... but im sure theres sth on the net to find and read about;
and about nuclear waste, frog, do u know that we have a nuclear power plant 50km from swinoujscie? in germany; ive been reading about its wastes... its almost filled by now and all waste should be removed in 2000yr; but the cost of 5mld usd slows down the operation...
now that is fun huh?
and the coverage is not as durable as they thought..

 

No, I did not knew... totally new for me... especially after Germany switched off all former DDR nuclear power plants in 1992... buahhaahaahaa (you can ask mosche about it if you don't believe me). Where have you learned about it? In "Wrуżka", "Tina-Światowe Życie" or "Super Express"? I will look through this specialistic periodics as soon as you'll give me the author of article

Ignorance, ignorance, ignorance- that's what I'm used to see, but I'm still unable to cope with.

As for nuclear waste... well it is a real problem, which Poland has already solved- using old Uranium ore mine to build a storage for previously granulated and deconcentrated waste (another nice Polish invention)... remember that we have scientific reactor in Świerk and although it doesn't produce energy, it does produce some waste... thank God Polish ecologists are too stupid to figure out, that not having nuclear power plants does not mean not having any nuclear reactors...

As for me- that's the end of discussion- I'm bored with explaining... go to library, have a decent portion of scientific reading, report back and prepare to be asked about some details (as I refuse further discussion with people who don't know what they talk about).

Sorry

 

here you can sleep there now, is a hotel, np

http://www.kernwasser-wunderland.de/seiten/allgemein/index.cfm?spracheschluessel=de

it cost us germans only 2,5 milliarden euro, a reaktor were never run, WTG

 

i see that the only non-ignorant guy around its u
u can try to laugh on me, but two things:
- it was afaik 1996
- nuclear wastes are still present no matter if nuclear plant works or not and are real threat,
that was the meaning of that;
still, there are some active pwr plants, producing wastes all the time

dont u forget its only scientific reactor, producing very small amount of waste;
the process of storing those wastes aint that great as u can think,
its not only its very expensive (Germany still have problems with it, and they are far more richier country than Poland; they have place for that, but utilization and storing the shit takes time);
more, we cant specify the consistency of those wastes in 100%, process u mention is not always as effective as we would wish;

i will not comment the rest of ur post because i see u cant stand i have different opinion (not only in this thread?) and i wont go into the childish smalltalk;

 

spuinciku... poczytaj, zmądrzej, dopiero potem dyskutuj... proszę... mam dość tego gуwnianego, śmierdzącego kloaką, tematu, ponieważ wiem, że 98% ludu będzie przeciwko mi.... jednocześnie 99% nie ma bladego pojęcia o czym mуwi...

prosiłem o poczytanie odrobinkę przed postowaniem ze mną... nie wyszło widzę... a więc to Ty okazujesz brak szacunku wobec mnie i mojej wiedzy a nie na odwrуt... przemyśl to proszę, lubię Ciebie jako kolegę i pilota w WBFH, ale to co prezentujesz tymi wypowiedziami nie jest godne miana człowieka światłego i oczytanego... pуjdźże do biblioteki... następny mуj post zawierać będzie pytania sprawdzające Twoją wiedzę na temat energetyki atomowej, więc nie pisz nieprzygotowany

 

Wir versteh'n die polnischen Sprache nicht, Herr Doktor Frog -- das ist alles Quatsch

 

a wiec pytaj

 

zreszta czekac mi si enie chce bo spac ide to ci napisze z grubsza co wiem o calej sprawie, i wtedy laskawie stwierdzisz czy rozmowa ze mna jest dopuszczalna czy nie...
zazcne od utylizacji
proces o ktorym wspomniales to o ile sie nie myle zeszkliwianie; przechowywanie odpadow zakonserwowanych w tym procesie nie jest takie rozowe, ciagle promieniowanie jest emitowane i moze przedostawac sie do od gruntowych; takie w poblizu kopalni soli jak zapewne wiesz wystepuja (w ktorych, o ile mi wiadomo mialyby byc, przechowywane odpady u nas); cos kiedys czytalem o odwiertach i czopowaniu, ale to jest bardziej ryzykowne od skladowania w pokladach soli ktorej zadaniem jest absorbowanie promieniowania;

dalej..
nie chcesz mi chyba powiedziec ze elektrownie typu pwr nie produkuja odpadow? takie elektrownie ciagle w niemczech funkcjonuja i funkcjonowac beda jeszcze przynajmniej 10-15 lat; byl specjalny dekret o tym, ale mneijsza o daty bo ich nie pamietam; faktem jest ze funkcjonowac beda jeszcze dosc dlugo (w niemczech) i wyprodukuja ogromne ilosci odpadow; koszt moze i dla niemcow nie jest taki rpzerazliwy, ale z tego co sie orientuje jest on porownywalny z rocznym budzetem naszego panstwa;

moim zdaniem, pieniadze te mozna przeznaczyc na inne formy pozyskiwania energii;

 

frog: I respect you spuint, but you write here BS; it is not worth of you; most of ppl dont understand this and write lot of BS, dont repeat after them

spuint: well a) the proccess of storing waste you are describing is. bla bla bla
b) talking about amounts of wastes.. in germany for some 10-15yrs plants will work, produce lot of waste; costs are terrible - equals to budget of one our administrative unit

hm.. be nice, you 2 fucking bastards

 

elenaґs story goes around the world :

http://www.heise.de/tp/deutsch/inhalt/on/17091/1.html

 

here you can run a simple java simulation of a atomary power plant

good luck !


http://www.particle.kth.se/~lindsey/JavaCourse/Lectures/Lecture_6A/mdc.html