Radiation

blu3ree

With the Fukushima power plant effecting the whole world how come the government never considered shooting up the radiated water into space? They find time and money to put rovers on other planets but no time into saving the ecology of earth. Yes I realize it melted down after power was out bc of the tsunami earthquake. But before this they just dumped 300 million gallons into the pacific ocean. Why is the gov not being more responsible?

Would like to hear peoples plans on how/what they are going to do to try and reduce the radiation they consume through foods water and living in general.

BhikkhuJayasara

imo governments and now corporations don't spend ENOUGH money sending rovers and learning about space. They spend far too much money on welfare programs and military.

space and other planets is our future,without new places to colonize a little radiation won't make much difference in the long run, especially with overpopulation and the massive die offs coming from the future wars that will be fought over water, not oil.

blu3ree

Jayantha said:

imo governments and now corporations don't spend ENOUGH money sending rovers and learning about space... space and other planets is our future,without that a little radiation won't ,make much difference in the long run, especially with overpopulation.

Whats the point in studying another planet when were so rapidly destroying this one that it's not guaranteed well live long enough to unveil the mysteries of the other planets. Were born on earth and not any other ones for a reason if we do somehow develop technology to go to a planet that is suitable for life it may have beings on it. If we don't preserve what we have and those beings know of what we did here I can't imagine them inviting us to live with them speaking that they are sentient.

blu3ree

If there's another war enough places have nukes to where the fighting will be people lifting their hands and pushing buttons. Then big booms everywhere.

BhikkhuJayasara

blu3ree said:

Jayantha said:

imo governments and now corporations don't spend ENOUGH money sending rovers and learning about space... space and other planets is our future,without that a little radiation won't ,make much difference in the long run, especially with overpopulation.

Whats the point in studying another planet when were so rapidly destroying this one that it's not guaranteed well live long enough to unveil the mysteries of the other planets. Were born on earth and not any other ones for a reason if we do somehow develop technology to go to a planet that is suitable for life it may have beings on it. If we don't preserve what we have and those beings know of what we did here I can't imagine them inviting us to live with them speaking that they are sentient.

what is there to preserve? people have to live and consume basic goods, more people = more consumption = less resources = major issues. The earth already cannot support the amount of humans it has on it now, let alone in 20 years. Even if "green" technology was way more advanced then the infancy it is in now, it still would not solve the overpopulation problem. There is a finite amount of water on the planet that is recycled over and over, it's already scarce in many places. There is also a finite amount of land for farming, unless we start preserving less and farming more, and even then there is a limit.

and btw we don't have to go to another planet necessarily, although a terraformed mars would be a good option if we had that tech.. we can go to the moon, and also stations in space.

blu3ree

I know that I would be a pretty depressed person without having trees and vegetation around me if we lived on a spacestation but also we'd need a way to not get hit by the radiation in space that can travel through the walls of metal.

We could have more green rooftops building up rather than out. Desalting the ocean water is another possibility.a limit on how many children a family can have.

vinlyn

blu3ree said:

With the Fukushima power plant effecting the whole world how come the government never considered shooting up the radiated water into space? They find time and money to put rovers on other planets but no time into saving the ecology of earth. Yes I realize it melted down after power was out bc of the tsunami earthquake. But before this they just dumped 300 million gallons into the pacific ocean. Why is the gov not being more responsible?

Would like to hear peoples plans on how/what they are going to do to try and reduce the radiation they consume through foods water and living in general.

I don't think you have any concept of how virtually impossible that would have been.

First of all, which government?

Second, an effort like that -- if feasible, which it is not -- would take a great deal of planning time...which was not available.

vinlyn

blu3ree said:

I know that I would be a pretty depressed person without having trees and vegetation around me if we lived on a spacestation but also we'd need a way to not get hit by the radiation in space that can travel through the walls of metal.

We could have more green rooftops building up rather than out. Desalting the ocean water is another possibility.a limit on how many children a family can have.

You're rambling.

maarten

The problem IMO is that our societies are not too concerned with preservation.
Otherwise, we would replace our nuclear reactors with safe molten salt reactors. :shake:

federica

vinlyn said:

You're rambling.

Join the club.....

robot

blu3ree said:

If there's another war enough places have nukes to where the fighting will be people lifting their hands and pushing buttons. Then big booms everywhere.

Be thankful if you weren't around for this.

http://www.ctbto.org/nuclear-testing/the-effects-of-nuclear-testing/general-overview-of-theeffects-of-nuclear-testing/

Dobs

Just did some quick number crunching. It would seem that sending 300 million gallons of water (@ 8.35lbs per gallon) into space (@$4729.00 a pound) 300,000,000 x 8.35 x 4729 = $11,846,145,000,000.00 Nearly 12 trillion dollars U.S.

Zero

blu3ree said:

With the Fukushima power plant effecting the whole world

how come the government never considered shooting up the radiated water into space?

They find time and money to put rovers on other planets but no time into saving the ecology of earth.

But before this they just dumped 300 million gallons into the pacific ocean. Why is the gov not being more responsible?

Would like to hear peoples plans on how/what they are going to do to try and reduce the radiation they consume through foods water and living in general.

Everything affects the whole world - every action has a consequence in the world - no one government could resource a global response - we can only momentarily hold back chaos and it seems to me that we do that in our own individually chaotic way!

A space shuttle takes about 500 tons of solid fuel (500,000kg) (with additional 500,000 gallons of compressed oxygen/hydrogen for orbit) to propel a relatively small pay-load (itself, equipment and people) into orbit - once there, it must maintain a certain speed or it will fall and burn or tumble into space - it sort of follows a flight path with all the other stuff out there - what I'm striving at is that, as far as the declared technologies go, we can't easily jump into space and once there we can't easily or safely navigate the considerable and deadly hazards.

300 million gallons of water I think equates to around 1.1 million tons of weight to carry and dump.

In addition, accidents happen - I haven't researched any study models of explosions involving radiated materials in our upper atmosphere - it doesn't sound like a good thing though... that volcano erupted in Iceland and planes were grounded, there was ash on my car...

I'm not sure it is possible to reduce radiation consumption in the way that you suggest but I guess I've never really considered radiation reduction... I don't even have any instrument to measure the radiation I am exposed to at the moment... I'm at about defcon 8: utterly unprepared and generally clueless.

vinlyn

federica said:

vinlyn said:

You're rambling.

Join the club.....

I am an occasional member.

blu3ree

Dobs said:

Just did some quick number crunching. It would seem that sending 300 million gallons of water (@ 8.35lbs per gallon) into space (@$4729.00 a pound) 300,000,000 x 8.35 x 4729 = $11,846,145,000,000.00 Nearly 12 trillion dollars U.S.

People working together to ensure a future is priceless.

vinlyn

Yeah, right. Where are you gonna find the $12 trillion?

robot

That only works if there was a vehicle to transport it anyway.
Then, if there was, the hole we would blow in the ozone layer doing it would likely let in many times more radiation than we would be shipping out.

blu3ree

robot said:

That only works if there was a vehicle to transport it anyway.
Then, if there was, the hole we would blow in the ozone layer doing it would likely let in many times more radiation than we would be shipping out.

Well that doesn't stop NASA to shoot rovers up or iss parts or cameras into space.
Maybe aliens would be willing to help?
I've personally seen 2 ufos at the same time flying overhead for like 3 mins last summer. Anyone else ever seen those saucer things?

karasti

If our planet became unhabitable wouldn't we just reincarnate on other planets then? I don't think we'd just cease to exist anymore. I'm not saying that is a reason not to be responsible of course. The easy yet complicated answer as to why the governments don't care is because people are not holding them accountable. People as a whole, don't care. In some countries simply because they are too selfish. In other countries because they cannot afford to care when they are already starving and suffering in that way. They prefer to argue over the fine points of global warming rather than take any action because they just think the planet will keep adapting and accepting more and more people on it. You'd be amazed how many people do not truly understand that our water is finite and that the same water we have now was falling as rain when the dinosaurs were here. I am lucky to live in an area that has abundant fresh water. While we of course have running water, if that suddenly ceased we would be able to provide for ourselves 100% off the land immediately around us. That so many people are 100% reliant on outside sources for their survival is scary to me.

Anyhow, I am not so sure that desalinating the ocean is going to work. There are quite a lot of animals and beings that live in the oceans. We can't just go about causing further massive disruptions to entire ecosystems. In the end, it will cause our downfall because we rely on all ecosystems working together for our survival.

It's just all together very sad how out of touch people are with the world around them, how it works together, how very sensitive it is to changes and disruptions. And just how often we change and disrupt those things thinking we are doing ourselves a favor.

blu3ree

That was wat I was thinking as far as reincarnation. the people who have negative karma go to lower realms of existence. how do they get out of hell if there is no earth? Are they stuck there until earth regenerates? Or does another heaven open up?

And tuna that is in the pacific ocean is going to be uneatable

karasti

When I was at a retreat with Lama Dudjob Dorjee, someone who is very environmentally minded asked him what to do about his guilt for having to drive a car 30 miles each way to go to Sangha meetings and retreats and such. The Lama kind of laughed about it and said that it really wasn't a big deal. He said it is important to be mindful and responsible, and that if it troubles him, his options are get a less harmful car, or carpool. But that it's just another combination of attachment and aversion, and that if we blow up our planet, we will simply incarnate on another one. I found that an interesting thing to hear and thought about it for a good while. I tend to agree with that, though have no basis at all for why I think so. It just makes the most "sense" to me.

maarten

I think technically the problem of water shortage is solvable, by extracting water from the air. However, just as with safe energy, as a society we need to focus on preservation and improving life conditions for everyone, otherwise the technology will not reach the places where it is needed.

blu3ree

Yes it makes sense. I am 20 without a car because I strongly disagree with oil companies. Kinda waiting around till the come out with an affordable electric car. Personally I avoid big cities bc the air is so nasty. Went to Detroit and the air there is much different than that in my home town.
Some attachments can be positive just like the dhamma. Just because their is clinging doesn't mean it's negative. Certainly not when it's for environmental. If we never clinged to something we would have never been born.

zombiegirl

blu3ree said:

Yes it makes sense just as the Buddha taught of amitabhas pure land of bliss. Just because one gets incarnated though doesn't mean it will be in a pleasant place. I am 20 without a car because I strongly disagree with oil companies. Kinda waiting around till the come out with an affordable electric car.
Some attachments can be positive just like the dhamma. Just because their is clinging doesn't mean it's negative. Certainly not when it's for environmental. If we never clinged to something we would have never been born.

You're in the Detroit area, right? Did you go to the auto show this year? It was actually my first time... and aside from hating nearly every moment of it because I could care less about cars... it was neat to get a look at all of the alternate energy cars. The Teslas in particular were really cool but talk about EXPENSIVE. Really, the best bet is to get a hybrid and use it mostly as an electric car, with the capabilities of gas every once and a while. But it's still going to cost you a pretty penny... But it is very nice to see that the industry is responding to demand and making more and more electric/hybrids. Eventually the price will come down, like all things...

blu3ree

I am on like the very very outskirts of the metro Detroit. I saw they have like a 50k price tag on em then became quite discouraged. trying to find a decent job is hard. It is nice to see more on electric cars as if we're to continue driving around switching from gas to electric would be very beneficial. But the average consumer can't afford the huge price tags. I could care less of cars also.