Green Shit

[Christopher McCandless]

What happened? Did someone run into it with a car?

Basically if the brakes fail on any wind turbine then they spin too fast and self destruct. Somehow I remain convinced the nukes are a tad safer...

 

What about Windscale in the UK, Three Mile Island, Santa Susana Field Lab in California or Chernobyl?

Windscale happened while developing the technology, and does not reflect on a modern reactor today. In fact the reactor was designed to help build an atomic bomb.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2007/10/09/scinuke109.xml
Santa Susana was also 50 years ago, so I think we can discount that one too.
In Three Mile Island the nuclear pumps went, again something that would not happen in a modern nuclear reactor with ill effects (they are designed now to be fail safe in that respect).
Chernobyl was down to total Russian incompetence, and poor reactor design (they used the RBMK).

I would be far more worried myself about all the nuclear weapons floating around, those could cause some real damage if they accidentally got set off. But again that has never happened. As long as they don't let total prats run or build a nuclear reactor, then we are fine.

[Parts]

Anything man made made can fuck up just some things affect lot lot more territory than their immediate area.  Wind turbines are in my option perfectly safe.  Though in my opinion they should start building nuclear plants in the US again technology has come some way since the accidents and properly built and maintained ones should be no problem

[renaeden]

I would prefer wind turbines anyday.

The wind turbines are set up in a clear area. Not like there are loads of people are around. I can't find anywhere where it is written that wind turbines have killed people.

[Christopher McCandless]

I would prefer wind turbines anyday.

The wind turbines are set up in a clear area. Not like there are loads of people are around. I can't find anywhere where it is written that wind turbines have killed people.

O really?
http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN2720796920070828
Also someone died while parachuting because they got lost and had to do a low turn to avoid it
http://www.dropzone.com/fatalities/Detailed/28.shtml
Thats two I could find off the top of my head...

[Parts]

I would prefer wind turbines anyday.

The wind turbines are set up in a clear area. Not like there are loads of people are around. I can't find anywhere where it is written that wind turbines have killed people.

As would I but in a practical sense I just don't think you could have enough in many areas

[Phlexor]

I would prefer wind turbines anyday.

The wind turbines are set up in a clear area. Not like there are loads of people are around. I can't find anywhere where it is written that wind turbines have killed people.

O really?
http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN2720796920070828
Also someone died while parachuting because they got lost and had to do a low turn to avoid it
http://www.dropzone.com/fatalities/Detailed/28.shtml
Thats two I could find off the top of my head...

Yes, because parachuting is a completely safe activity that usually has no accident or fatalities.

[Phlexor]

When can we have this instead?

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Christopher McCandless]

I would prefer wind turbines anyday.

The wind turbines are set up in a clear area. Not like there are loads of people are around. I can't find anywhere where it is written that wind turbines have killed people.

O really?
http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN2720796920070828
Also someone died while parachuting because they got lost and had to do a low turn to avoid it
http://www.dropzone.com/fatalities/Detailed/28.shtml
Thats two I could find off the top of my head...

Yes, because parachuting is a completely safe activity that usually has no accident or fatalities.

Its safer than driving your car if you are not a prat. Most of the fatalities are suicides or people not following instructions.

[Phlexor]

I would prefer wind turbines anyday.

The wind turbines are set up in a clear area. Not like there are loads of people are around. I can't find anywhere where it is written that wind turbines have killed people.

O really?
http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN2720796920070828
Also someone died while parachuting because they got lost and had to do a low turn to avoid it
http://www.dropzone.com/fatalities/Detailed/28.shtml
Thats two I could find off the top of my head...

Yes, because parachuting is a completely safe activity that usually has no accident or fatalities.

Its safer than driving your car if you are not a prat. Most of the fatalities are suicides or people not following instructions.

Yes, but that can be said of pretty much any technology or activity. Which is my point.

[renaeden]

Thats two I could find off the top of my head...

Well I don't have access to the top of your head....

When can we have this instead?

A few ZPMs would be good. 

[Christopher McCandless]

I would prefer wind turbines anyday.

The wind turbines are set up in a clear area. Not like there are loads of people are around. I can't find anywhere where it is written that wind turbines have killed people.

O really?
http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN2720796920070828
Also someone died while parachuting because they got lost and had to do a low turn to avoid it
http://www.dropzone.com/fatalities/Detailed/28.shtml
Thats two I could find off the top of my head...

Yes, because parachuting is a completely safe activity that usually has no accident or fatalities.

Its safer than driving your car if you are not a prat. Most of the fatalities are suicides or people not following instructions.

Yes, but that can be said of pretty much any technology or activity. Which is my point.

Would you drive your car if it exploded when the brakes failed? When these turbines get a few years old, or heaven forbid we get microgeneration everywhere, they are going to become a real hazard.

[Callaway]

Would you drive your car if it exploded when the brakes failed? When these turbines get a few years old, or heaven forbid we get microgeneration everywhere, they are going to become a real hazard.

There are benefits and risks in almost anything, Hadron.

Would you continue jumping out of perfectly good airplanes if there was a good chance that you could die?

26 people have died doing that in 2008, so far.

61 people died doing that in 2007.

60 people died doing that in 2006.

61 people died doing that in 2005.

http://www.dropzone.com/fatalities/index.shtml

Do you propose that everyone stop skydiving?

What about driving a car? 

There were 38,588 fatal motor vehicle crashes in 2006 in the US alone, with 42,642 fatalities.

http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx

Do you propose that everyone stop driving?

[Phlexor]

I would prefer wind turbines anyday.

The wind turbines are set up in a clear area. Not like there are loads of people are around. I can't find anywhere where it is written that wind turbines have killed people.

O really?
http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN2720796920070828
Also someone died while parachuting because they got lost and had to do a low turn to avoid it
http://www.dropzone.com/fatalities/Detailed/28.shtml
Thats two I could find off the top of my head...

Yes, because parachuting is a completely safe activity that usually has no accident or fatalities.

Its safer than driving your car if you are not a prat. Most of the fatalities are suicides or people not following instructions.

Yes, but that can be said of pretty much any technology or activity. Which is my point.

Would you drive your car if it exploded when the brakes failed? When these turbines get a few years old, or heaven forbid we get microgeneration everywhere, they are going to become a real hazard.

Oh you mean like Hollywood cars? Yeah why not. Perhaps then more people would take road safety seriously.

The problem I have with your arguement is that you are comparing a well maintained nuclear reactor with a poorly, if not at all, maintain wind turbine.

[Christopher McCandless]

Would you drive your car if it exploded when the brakes failed? When these turbines get a few years old, or heaven forbid we get microgeneration everywhere, they are going to become a real hazard.

There are benefits and risks in almost anything, Hadron.

Would you continue jumping out of perfectly good airplanes if there was a good chance that you could die?

26 people have died doing that in 2008, so far.

61 people died doing that in 2007.

60 people died doing that in 2006.

61 people died doing that in 2005.

http://www.dropzone.com/fatalities/index.shtml

Do you propose that everyone stop skydiving?

What about driving a car? 

There were 38,588 fatal motor vehicle crashes in 2006 in the US alone, with 42,642 fatalities.

http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx

Do you propose that everyone stop driving?

The difference is you have the choice to get into a plane, car or whatever. You don't have a choice if someone puts a wind turbine next to your house. Plus with both cars and parachutes you have several fail-safes, with a wind turbine if the brakes go, it explodes, simple as. I certainly would be uneasy if I had to walk past a few wind turbines whenever I go for a walk.

Mind, I think driving and parachuting could both be a lot safer mind. Though the general rule with both is that you are safe if you dont be a prat.

[Parts]

Even if you chose not to go in a car you still have to worry about them hitting you