Jump to content
Sign

Meltdowns/Solar Flares

Recommended Posts

Ok so I have a meltdown adv with Mexico and the internal link is solar flares which I thought was really good until someone told me that there has been a lot of solar flare arguments on the space topic which at the time I didnt do debate. I looked at past openev files on it and it doesn't say much. I need help answering 

 

1. Solar flares happen all the time/Solar flares inevitable

2. Past meltdowns disprove extintion impact

3. If a solar flare was able to cause a nuclear meltdown that amount of UV heat will kill us even if we solve meltdowns

 

I have been trying to find ev but I haven't found anything

Can anyone post ev or cards or files that can help me. Or if you have anything trade me?

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are better internal links to nuclear meltdowns than solar flares.  (Seriously, how does Mexico link to Solar Flares?)  They're even on openev xP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are better internal links to nuclear meltdowns than solar flares.  (Seriously, how does Mexico link to Solar Flares?)  They're even on openev xP

Where on Open ev and a solar flare is likely to happen before 2020 and it will cause all nuclear reactors to overheat and meltdown all at once which will cause a radiation leak, which leads to extinction. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The links to nuclear meltdowns on openev have nothing to do with solar flares.  (And that link story sounds ridiculous.  A solar flare which did that would *boil rivers* and kill basically everyone on the day side of the planet).

 

The links to nuclear meltdowns have to do with baseline capacity, peak demand surges, and nuclear plant use of electricity to power cooling equipment.  Links to excessive focus on renewables, actually.  (So if you're running renewables, sorry).

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The links to nuclear meltdowns on openev have nothing to do with solar flares.  (And that link story sounds ridiculous.  A solar flare which did that would *boil rivers* and kill basically everyone on the day side of the planet).

 

The links to nuclear meltdowns have to do with baseline capacity, peak demand surges, and nuclear plant use of electricity to power cooling equipment.  Links to excessive focus on renewables, actually.  (So if you're running renewables, sorry).

Ok but where are you getting this from is my question. Where on open ev like which file.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey! I ran this argument on the space topic and I'd be happy to help.

 

 

The links to nuclear meltdowns on openev have nothing to do with solar flares.  (And that link story sounds ridiculous.  A solar flare which did that would *boil rivers* and kill basically everyone on the day side of the planet).

 

The links to nuclear meltdowns have to do with baseline capacity, peak demand surges, and nuclear plant use of electricity to power cooling equipment.  Links to excessive focus on renewables, actually.  (So if you're running renewables, sorry).

Solar flares is actually a decent internal link. No one is saying a solar flare will hit with the intensity to boil rivers. Basically, solar flares have a habit of disrupting electronics critical for functioning, which is why solar flares are a major risk for satellites, sometimes cause radio shortages and blackouts, and even in 1859 caused the Carrington Event, which caused nearly all the telegraph systems in Europe and North America to fail or even combust. 

 

The nuclear plant internal link is that a massive solar flare would trigger the collapse of the global power grid (which has a host of very bad impacts), causing nuclear power plants to fail (nuclear power plants run from the grid, if they can't get external power they meltdown, see Fukushima), and extinction.

 

No one is saying that solar storms cause physical damage.

 

Ok so I have a meltdown adv with Mexico and the internal link is solar flares which I thought was really good until someone told me that there has been a lot of solar flare arguments on the space topic which at the time I didnt do debate. I looked at past openev files on it and it doesn't say much. I need help answering 

 

1. Solar flares happen all the time/Solar flares inevitable

2. Past meltdowns disprove extintion impact

3. If a solar flare was able to cause a nuclear meltdown that amount of UV heat will kill us even if we solve meltdowns

 

I have been trying to find ev but I haven't found anything

Can anyone post ev or cards or files that can help me. Or if you have anything trade me?

 

1. There's very good evidence that indicates a particularly strong / massive solar storm is coming our way. I remember on the space topic the evidence said late 2012/early 2013, but you'll probably be able to find some evidence that says that the strong storm is coming. This is based off like 150-year long solar cycles. And past solar flares causing blackouts only proves the internal link, because the power grid is stressed more than ever and is on the brink of collapse (2003 solar storm took out the northeast power grid). Now is key, because solar storms are getting stronger and the power grid is getting weaker.

 

2. Past meltdowns only put us on the brink and they don't assume the failure of the ~500? nuclear power plants around the world.

 

Here's some cards that should help with the impact

(This article has a lot of money cards in it: http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/213249/20110914/solar-flare-could-unleash-nuclear-holocaust-across-planet-earth-forcing-hundreds-of-nuclear-power-pl.htm)

 

Reactor meltdowns cause extinction - supervolcanoes

Turchin 11

 â€œThe worst scenario for nuclear power plant disaster andthe risk of human extinction†Alexai Turchin; Expert of global catastrophes of Russian Transhumanist Movement, Research Fellow in Foundation “Science for longer lifeâ€; 4-6-2011 http://www.scribd.com/doc/52440799/Worst-Case-Scenario-of-Nuclear-Accidents-human-extinction

"China Syndrome" - penetration of the crust That is, the formation of a large drop of very heavy liquid fuel, which is on its way to melt all - concrete, gravel, rock. A similar project is discussed in an article in “Nature†to create a probe thatcould reach the Earth's core. This so-called Stevenson probe, which consists of 1million tons of molten iron and burns its way down.As shown by Milan Cirkovic in his article "Geo-engineering that went awry"http://www.proza.ru/2007/11/10/290 penetrating Earth curst with huge drop of molten metal (Stevenson probe) can lead to the formation of the channel to the molten core of the Earth up to the surface on which the top begins to break out of magma and gases. This will lead to degassing of the nucleus in the form of a giant volcanic eruption that will completely change the composition of the atmosphere and destroy all life on Earth. It was shown that even a small drop of fuel - 10 kg - will dive at a speed of 2.5 meters / day. A drop of several hundred tons can dive to a few tens of metersper day, I think. Or 10 km per year, for instance.Under Japan are large volcanic reservoirs that feed the Fuji and other volcanoes, the distance to them is around a few tens of kilometers down. It is unknown whether there are magma tanks directly under the Fukusima station. In the mantle of the movement will drop even faster as mantia is hot and plastic. Time to reach these volcanic reservoirs may be about 10 years. It is possible that the channel behind the fuel droplet is completely closed, but it is possible that will remain softer due to residual fuel on its walls. Then this channel will extrude up, like toothpaste from a tube. And well, if this shallow reservoir, which simply spit out the fuel and lead to the emergence of a new volcano. Worse, if the drop reach a deep reservoir at adepth of hundreds of kilometers, or to the very earth core, which will mentioned above degassing of the core (which is probably long overdue, and already partly taken place on Venus). This immersion of the drop can take dozens of years, in the course of which nothing much will be observed. Or maybe less. According to personal communication of a Russian scientist,they performed studies on the establishment of a nuclear reactor, glorifying its wayinside the earth to deliver a research probe to the core, and the term of his dives aremuch smaller.

Reactor meltdowns cause extinction – radiophobia turns every impact

Turchin 11

 â€œThe worst scenario for nuclear power plant disaster andthe risk of human extinction†Alexai Turchin; Expert of global catastrophes of Russian Transhumanist Movement, Research Fellow in Foundation “Science for longer lifeâ€; 4-6-2011 http://www.scribd.com/doc/52440799/Worst-Case-Scenario-of-Nuclear-Accidents-human-extinction

The collapse of technological civilization, as a result of a systemic crisis, associated with not developing new technologies, radiophobia, economic crisis, the evacuation of the population, rise in price of food, lack of energy Mainly affects the factor of radiation - it's panic. When an accident source of cesium in the Brazilian city of Guyana, 4 people were killed, but the GDP of thisregion fell in the next year by 30 percent due to the exodus of businesses. Good example of such consequence is the fall of USSR after Chernobyl.The more complex the system, the major role in her behavior plays an informational component. In other words, it can be destroyed due to incorrect commands. A person can die from fear, but a tree can’t. Remote effects of radiation is difficult to measure but radiophobia is real as an idea that took over the masses. Just as the mines in a minefield not kill many soldiers, but paralyze the activity of the infantry, this is their primary role. As such a crisis, we can consider the possible consequences of the accident at the Fukushima (written March 26, 2011 d). One of the possible worst-case scenarios. Contamination of the sea and food, as well as fear of infection will lead to higher prices for products in the world. At the same time increase the need for fossil fuel, to plug holes in the power systems. This is a bio-fuel and fertilizer, also hit prices, a threat of famine. People begin to stockpile. Intense unrest, such as Arabic, 2011, can also capture India, Saudi Arabia,Algeria and China. There will be a further rise in oil prices, global recession, the collapse of the financial system. There will be a movement of Luddites, destroying technology. Spread of illness associated with consumption of radioactive food. The world will be in the depths of the all-out civil war, many "tribes". The world economy will collapse. Will there be local nuclear war. Other nuclear power plants explode. Spread the virus and drug-resistant TB, exacerbated by globalwarming. The planet's population will be reduced several times. Further extension of global catastrophe is possible, the increase of degradation and extinction, or the gradual restoration of civilization. Another scenario involves a systemic crisis, and after a period of degradation beginning of increased competition of superpowers, a new arms race, creating new dangerous weapons (cobalt bomb, nanotech, viruses) and then a global catastrophe with their application.

Reactor meltdown is the biggest impact – recovery, probability, and timeframe

Poppins 12

“Fukushima, denial, and the ethics of extinction†Mary Poppins; environmental activist, worked at Fukushima; May 21, 2012 http://guymcpherson.com/2012/05/fukushima-denial-and-the-ethics-of-extinction/

We have created astoundingly toxic substances which have not been present on the surface of this planet in billions of years; some have never been here before. All are made in nuclear reactors — they do not occur in nature. The particulars of this problem are well documented and need not be repeated here, except to note that earth’s living beings do not have eons of genetic adaptation to constant high radiation levels. All other problems allow some optimism about the long term prospect for recovery after the human rampage is over. This threat is different in kind from other environmental problems because radioactivity directly disrupts or destroys the ability of genes to accurately replicate. This is not repairable. We menace everything, not just ourselves. For about seventy years, we’ve been building and operating reactors with design lives of maybe 40 years. There are roughly 450 operating civilian reactors, and a guesstimated 500+ military, research, and other reactors, all of which continue to produce radioisotopes with half-lives ranging from seconds to millions of years in containments designed as temporary until the waste problem is solved. Unfortunately, no solution has been found, and when the containments begin to fail significantly, all the garbage sitting in them will disperse into the environment. There is no other choice- remove this crap from the biosphere, or eat, breathe, and wear it, wash with it, walk on it and drink it when the containment fails. We’re there. You’re now looking down the barrel of the gun that is the likeliest of all to kill you, me and everyone we know. It’s not vague any longer. This is the specific problem that will end civilization and ruin the biosphere, with a specific mechanism of action and a very short time frame.

Meltdowns are comparatively the biggest impact – Fukushima and depleted uranium put us on the brink

Daley 11

“NUCLEAR POWER TECHNOLOGY, AN EXTINCTION LEVEL EVENT!†Peter Daley; Australian government official; 2011 http://sccc.org.au/archives/2186

 It's not a meteor impact, large solar flare, or nuclear war that could cause an Extinction Level Event to humanity, but nuclear reactor meltdowns through, war, sabotage, human error, or natural disaster. In my opinion at the present time, nuclear power technology has become the greatest danger to the survival of the human race. There are around 1,000 nuclear reactors in the world, 442 for generating electricity, 250 research reactors, and the rest are military. Fifty two are in Japan, a very earthquake active zone. There are plans to build another 50+ nuclear power reactors for generating electricity in India and China, in the next decade alone. All we need is for a couple more nuclear plants to suffer similar disasters to Fukushima, and the world will become so contaminated with radiation that the human race will be wiped out. Before the Fukushima disaster, radiation pollution from nuclear reactors and depleted uranium munitions were already causing male sperm counts to drop dramatically, increased birth defects, and increases in cancer rates.

Nuclear reactor meltdown is worse than nuclear war; radiation is three times worse, lasts longer, and contaminates more areas

Nissani 6

Moti Nissani; Associate Professor/ Genetics, Campaign Financing, Environmental Science & Politics, Greenhouse Effect, English, Media Studies, Cold War History, Critical Thinking, Philosophy, Cognitive Psychology, Teeth Clenching & Grinding, Interdisciplinarity; December of 2006

http://www.is.wayne.edu/mnissani/pagepub/CH2.html

Radioactive materials produced in nuclear power plants decay more slowly than the by-products of nuclear bombs,3 so the devastation of nuclear power plants would considerably increase the area which would remain unsafe for human habitation after the war. For breeder reactors, reprocessing facilities, and near-ground radioactive waste-disposal sites, the picture is even grimmer: certain portions of the Commonwealth of Independent States, the eastern half of the continental U.S., the states of Washington and California, and considerable portions of Western Europe, could be contaminated for decades. Even centuries later, it might be advisable to check radioactivity levels before buying land in these regions. The wartime vaporization of most nuclear power facilities will increase (by about one-third) average global fallout and its long-term effects. Moreover, because radioactive materials from this source are longer-lived than materials produced by nuclear bombs, their relative contribution to the global fallout will increase over time. For instance, ten years after the war, total radioactivity in global fallout would be three times higher with such vaporization than without it.

Nuclear meltdown causes extinction – only 100 are needed

IBT Science 11

“Solar Flare could unleash nuclear holocaust across planet earth forcing hundreds of nuclear power plants into total meltdowns†September 14, 2011 9:55 AM EST  (NaturalNews) http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/213249/20110914/solar-flare-could-unleash-nuclear-holocaust-across-planet-earth-forcing-hundreds-of-nuclear-power-pl.htm

Fukushima was one power plant. Imagine the devastation of 100+ nuclear power plants, all going into meltdown all at once across the planet. It's not the loss of electricity that's the real problem; it's the global tidal wave of invisible radiation that blankets the planet, permeates the topsoil, irradiates everything that breathes and delivers the final crushing blow to human civilization as we know it today. Because if you have 100 simultaneous global nuclear meltdowns, the tidal wave of radiation will make farming nearly impossible for years. That means no food production for several years in a row. And that, in turn, means a near-total collapse of the human population on our planet. How many people can survive an entire year with no food from the farms? Not one in a hundred people. Even beyond that, how many people can essentially live underground and be safe enough from the radiation that they can have viable children and repopulate the planet? It's a very, very small fraction of the total population. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone should read Wasserman because it's obviously the best card ever written am I right?

 

The warrants for extinction are fabulous

 

Nuclear meltdown cause extinction – any risk of an accident must be avoided.

Wasserman 01(Harvey Wasserman, senior editor of NIRS, October 2001, “America’s Terrorist Nuclear Threat to Itself†< http://www.nirs.org/reactorwatch/security/wassermannukesecurity.htm>)

The intense radioactive heat within today's operating reactors is the hottest anywhere on the planet. So are the hellish levels of radioactivity. Because Indian Point has operated so long, its accumulated radioactive burden far exceeds that of Chernobyl, which ran only four years before it exploded. Some believe the WTC jets could have collapsed or breached either of the Indian Point containment domes. But at very least the massive impact and intense jet fuel fire would destroy the human ability to control the plants' functions. Vital cooling systems, backup power generators and communications networks would crumble. Indeed, Indian Point Unit One was shut because activists warned that its lack of an emergency core cooling system made it an unacceptable risk. The government ultimately agreed. But today terrorist attacks could destroy those same critical cooling and control systems that are vital to not only the Unit Two and Three reactor cores, but to the spent fuel pools that sit on site. The assault would not require a large jet. The safety systems are extremely complex and virtually indefensible. One or more could be wiped out with a wide range of easily deployed small aircraft, ground-based weapons, truck bombs or even chemical/biological assaults aimed at the operating work force. Dozens of US reactors have repeatedly failed even modest security tests over the years. Even heightened wartime standards cannot guarantee protection of the vast, supremely sensitive controls required for reactor safety. Without continous monitoring and guaranteed water flow, the thousands of tons of radioactive rods in the cores and the thousands more stored in those fragile pools would rapidly melt into super-hot radioactive balls of lava that would burn into the ground and the water table and, ultimately, the Hudson. Indeed, a jetcrash like the one on 9/11 or other forms of terrorist assault at Indian Point could yield three infernal fireballs of molten radioactive lava burning through the earth and into the aquifer and the river. Striking water they would blast gigantic billows of horribly radioactive steam into the atmosphere. Prevailing winds from the north and west might initially drive these clouds of mass death downriver into New York City and east into Westchester and Long Island. But at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, winds ultimately shifted around the compass to irradiate all surrounding areas with the devastating poisons released by the on-going fiery torrent. At Indian Point, thousands of square miles would have been saturated with the most lethal clouds ever created or imagined, depositing relentless genetic poisons that would kill forever. In nearby communities like Buchanan, Nyack, Monsey and scores more, infants and small children would quickly die en masse. Virtually all pregnant women would spontaneously abort, or ultimately give birth to horribly deformed offspring. Ghastly sores, rashes, ulcerations and burns would afflict the skin of millions. Emphysema, heart attacks, stroke, multiple organ failure, hair loss, nausea, inability to eat or drink or swallow, diarrhea and incontinance, sterility and impotence, asthma, blindness, and more would kill thousands on the spot, and doom hundreds of thousands if not millions. A terrible metallic taste would afflict virtually everyone downwind in New York, New Jersey and New England, a ghoulish curse similar to that endured by the fliers who dropped the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagaskai, by those living downwind from nuclear bomb tests in the south seas and Nevada, and by victims caught in the downdrafts from Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. Then comes the abominable wave of cancers, leukemias, lymphomas, tumors and hellish diseases for which new names will have to be invented, and new dimensions of agony will beg description. Indeed, those who survived the initial wave of radiation would envy those who did not. Evacuation would be impossible, but thousands would die trying. Bridges and highways would become killing fields for those attempting to escape to destinations that would soon enough become equally deadly as the winds shifted. Attempts to quench the fires would be futile. At Chernobyl, pilots flying helicopters that dropped boron on the fiery core died in droves. At Indian Point, such missions would be a sure ticket to death. Their utility would be doubtful as the molten cores rage uncontrolled for days, weeks and years, spewing ever more devastation into the eco- sphere. More than 800,000 Soviet draftees were forced through Chernobyl's seething remains in a futile attempt to clean it up. They are dying in droves. Who would now volunteer for such an American task force? The radioactive cloud from Chernobyl blanketed the vast Ukraine and Belarus landscape, then carried over Europe and into the jetstream, surging through the west coast of the United States within ten days, carrying across our northern tier, circling the globe, then coming back again. The radioactive clouds from Indian Point would enshroud New York, New Jersey, New England, and carry deep into the Atlantic and up into Canada and across to Europe and around the globe again and again. The immediate damage would render thousands of the world's most populous and expensive square miles permanently uninhabitable. All five boroughs of New York City would be an apocalyptic wasteland. The World Trade Center would be rendered as unusable and even more lethal by a jet crash at Indian Point than it was by the direct hits of 9/11. All real estate and economic value would be poisonously radioactive throughout the entire region. Irreplaceable trillions in human capital would be forever lost. As at Three Mile Island, where thousands of farm and wild animals died in heaps, and as at Chernobyl, where soil, water and plant life have been hopelessly irradiated, natural eco-systems on which human and all other life depends would be permanently and irrevocably destroyed,  Spiritually, psychologically, financially, ecologically, our nation would never recover. This is what we missed by a mere forty miles near New York City on September 11. Now that we are at war, this is what could be happening as you read this. There are 103 of these potential Bombs of the Apocalypse now operating in the United States. They generate just 18% of America's electricity, just 8% of our total energy. As with reactors elsewhere, the two at Indian Point have both been off-line for long periods of time with no appreciable impact on life in New York. Already an extremely expensive source of electricity, the cost of attempting to defend these reactors will put nuclear energy even further off the competitive scale. Since its deregulation crisis, California---already the nation's second-most efficient state---cut further into its electric consumption by some 15%. Within a year the US could cheaply replace virtually with increased efficiency all the reactors now so much more expensive to operate and protect. Yet, as the bombs fall and the terror escalates, Congress is fast-tracking a form of legal immunity to protect the operators of reactors like Indian Point from liability in case of a meltdown or terrorist attack. Why is our nation handing its proclaimed enemies the weapons of our own mass destruction, and then shielding from liability the companies that insist on continuing to operate them? Do we take this war seriously? Are we committed to the survival of our nation?  If so, the ticking reactor bombs that could obliterate the very core of our life and of all future generations must be shut down.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously, people, the fact that someone wrote something and put it on the Internet does not make it good evidence.

 

And under the NFL rules on power tagging, I'd happily argue that your decision to not read the phrase "in nearby communities" in the Wasserman card justifies an immediate punishment ballot.

 

I realize policy debaters have predicted about a billion of the last zero extinction events, but you can do better.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously, people, the fact that someone wrote something and put it on the Internet does not make it good evidence.

 

And under the NFL rules on power tagging, I'd happily argue that your decision to not read the phrase "in nearby communities" in the Wasserman card justifies an immediate punishment ballot.

 

I realize policy debaters have predicted about a billion of the last zero extinction events, but you can do better.

 

#takingjokesseriously

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps more relevantly, as bad as Fukushima's Daiishi disaster was, it pretty much empirically disproved Wasserman's alarmist claims. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fukushima shouldn't even have been news. Less than 1000 deaths will eventually result from it, compared to 20,000 instant deaths from the tsunami.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...