Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
No need for wiki I checked it all out last year. My Papa was a foreman on a nuclear plant revamp/expansion for several years when I was growing up so I have kind of kept track on them over the years knowing the health issues it caused him.It was considered the most dangerous plant in the US in 2011 due to the age, the population surrounding it and its inability to withstand a larger earthquake. Its easy to look up the stats online.Testing showing what is leaking has been blown out of proportion? It has been leaking for a long time. Twenty million people live in that area that are affected by the plant that has been consider the most dangerous nuclear plant in the country for years. The investors have known this for years and should have already had another backup plan in place.Besides the stuff Riverkeeper blew out of proportion, what is it that you're talking about?
Where is your data for calling it "the most dangerous nuclear plant in the country"?
You do realize how subjective most of those categories are? They deal with risks, potential risks, and assumptions of catastrophic failures, not actual safety lapses or issues.
The plant has actually been out of increased federal monitoring for a few years now, due to its increased safety culture. Look up the wiki article for details.
My take on them is they are all too risky.No need for wiki I checked it all out last year. My Papa was a foreman on a nuclear plant revamp/expansion for several years when I was growing up so I have kind of kept track on them over the years knowing the health issues it caused him.It was considered the most dangerous plant in the US in 2011 due to the age, the population surrounding it and its inability to withstand a larger earthquake. Its easy to look up the stats online.Testing showing what is leaking has been blown out of proportion? It has been leaking for a long time. Twenty million people live in that area that are affected by the plant that has been consider the most dangerous nuclear plant in the country for years. The investors have known this for years and should have already had another backup plan in place.
Where is your data for calling it "the most dangerous nuclear plant in the country"?
You do realize how subjective most of those categories are? They deal with risks, potential risks, and assumptions of catastrophic failures, not actual safety lapses or issues.
The plant has actually been out of increased federal monitoring for a few years now, due to its increased safety culture. Look up the wiki article for details.
That still doesn't make Indian Point somehow the "most dangerous plant" in the country. There is the fact that any serious accident could impact a large, mostly static population, but again, that is a risk, not a hard technical issue that would make something in the plant truly dangerous.
My take on them is they are all too risky.No need for wiki I checked it all out last year. My Papa was a foreman on a nuclear plant revamp/expansion for several years when I was growing up so I have kind of kept track on them over the years knowing the health issues it caused him.It was considered the most dangerous plant in the US in 2011 due to the age, the population surrounding it and its inability to withstand a larger earthquake. Its easy to look up the stats online.Where is your data for calling it "the most dangerous nuclear plant in the country"?
You do realize how subjective most of those categories are? They deal with risks, potential risks, and assumptions of catastrophic failures, not actual safety lapses or issues.
The plant has actually been out of increased federal monitoring for a few years now, due to its increased safety culture. Look up the wiki article for details.
That still doesn't make Indian Point somehow the "most dangerous plant" in the country. There is the fact that any serious accident could impact a large, mostly static population, but again, that is a risk, not a hard technical issue that would make something in the plant truly dangerous.
NY Governor shutting down successful nuclear power plant because… it’s New York - Hot Air
"Mr. Cuomo will claim the long-sought shutdown as a victory in the State of the State speeches he is scheduled to deliver in the city and other locations this week"
TWEET:
For 15 years, I have been deeply concerned by safety violations at Indian Point, especially given its location. We're going to shut it down. pic.twitter.com/e0b71Y0URZ
— Andrew Cuomo (@NYGovCuomo) January 9, 2017
So Liberals / Cuomo thinks Nuclear Power Plants are too dangerous in US hands...but Clinton thought it was a great idea for North Korea to have them and Obama thinks it's a great idea for Iran to have them..... Hmmmm...
AP Exclusive: Diplomats: Iran to get natural uranium batch
('Like enriched uranium, plutonium can be turned into the fissile core of a nuclear weapon' ... or a dirty bomb.)
Testing showing what is leaking has been blown out of proportion? It has been leaking for a long time. Twenty million people live in that area that are affected by the plant that has been consider the most dangerous nuclear plant in the country for years. The investors have known this for years and should have already had another backup plan in place.Besides the stuff Riverkeeper blew out of proportion, what is it that you're talking about?Leaking radio active particles is a problem.The plant is old and has had problems..It has nothing to do with your political agenda...
Oh? What "problems" has it had?
It supplies 25% of our power. I'm moving out of the county before this bonehead idea is implemented
It should be obvious to most people that nuclear accidents affect more than just the people in that immediate area after fukushima. Our bill runs just under a hundred dollars a month because we are very conservative on electric use. People affected by any lose that is if there is one may have to learn to be more conservative with what they use.Testing showing what is leaking has been blown out of proportion? It has been leaking for a long time. Twenty million people live in that area that are affected by the plant that has been consider the most dangerous nuclear plant in the country for years. The investors have known this for years and should have already had another backup plan in place.Besides the stuff Riverkeeper blew out of proportion, what is it that you're talking about?Leaking radio active particles is a problem.The plant is old and has had problems..It has nothing to do with your political agenda...
Oh? What "problems" has it had?
It supplies 25% of our power. I'm moving out of the county before this bonehead idea is implemented
I live in the area, FFS! The certainty of losing 25% of our power by shutting it down is far, far worse and will kill more people than letting it continue to run.
It should be obvious to most people that nuclear accidents affect more than just the people in that immediate area after fukushima. Our bill runs just under a hundred dollars a month because we are very conservative on electric use. People affected by any lose that is if there is one may have to learn to be more conservative with what they use.Testing showing what is leaking has been blown out of proportion? It has been leaking for a long time. Twenty million people live in that area that are affected by the plant that has been consider the most dangerous nuclear plant in the country for years. The investors have known this for years and should have already had another backup plan in place.Besides the stuff Riverkeeper blew out of proportion, what is it that you're talking about?Leaking radio active particles is a problem.Oh? What "problems" has it had?
It supplies 25% of our power. I'm moving out of the county before this bonehead idea is implemented
I live in the area, FFS! The certainty of losing 25% of our power by shutting it down is far, far worse and will kill more people than letting it continue to run.
Try to keep up. Cuomo, a Liberal - Mr. '320z sodas are too dangerous for Americans to be entrusted with' - believes nuclear energy is too dangerous for Americans to handle / have, but liberals believe nations like North Korea (Clinton) and Iran (Obama/Kerry) believe we should help Iran get all the uranium and have all the nuclear power plants they want. I find that interesting. Good for them.When did Governor Cuomo say Iran should have nukes?
I believe the resulting 5-foot rabbits and 2-body/1-headed cows after Fukushima and Chernobyl could help to resolve the world's hunger problems.It should be obvious to most people that nuclear accidents affect more than just the people in that immediate area after fukushima.
Yes that is a consideration but if we humans react in a similar fashion it would be a zero gain.I believe the resulting 5-foot rabbits and 2-body/1-headed cows after Fukushima and Chernobyl could help to resolve the world's hunger problems.It should be obvious to most people that nuclear accidents affect more than just the people in that immediate area after fukushima.
