Writing a paper on no information sources?

2008-06-04 16:46:24

#1

Noobpatty: ʎʇʇɐdqoou; +194|6824|West NY

My project paper says "Choose one side...Toxic waste sites do not pose a hazard once cleaned / Even when cleaned they do"
How am I supposed to find anything on this? Simply explaining what it is would be fine but I have to tell why or why not it's safe to build in places like the love canal...but I can't find shit about anyone arguing over that. Any suggestions? D:
(karmaz.)

2008-06-04 16:51:44

#2

Zimmer: Un Moderador; +1,688|7227|Scotland

Eg - Oil spills in the ocean, nuclear disasters ( chernobyl ) etc. I would stand for the latter argument, as it's good to bring up points of never actually being able to clean radioactive source and the sort.

2008-06-04 16:54:55

#3

Noobpatty: ʎʇʇɐdqoou; +194|6824|West NY

Zimmer wrote:
Eg - Oil spills in the ocean, nuclear disasters ( chernobyl ) etc. I would stand for the latter argument, as it's good to bring up points of never actually being able to clean radioactive source and the sort.

Thanks a million...but they can be partially cleaned...but I get your point.

2008-06-04 16:57:19

#4

Zimmer: Un Moderador; +1,688|7227|Scotland

Noobpatty wrote:
Zimmer wrote:
Eg - Oil spills in the ocean, nuclear disasters ( chernobyl ) etc. I would stand for the latter argument, as it's good to bring up points of never actually being able to clean radioactive source and the sort.
Thanks a million...but they can be partially cleaned...but I get your point.

Read up on wiki, Chernobyl will still be uninhabitable for a very long time - cleaning up in this case is shoving a "sarcophagus" above the damaged site.

2008-06-04 17:01:51

#5

TSI: Cholera in the time of love; +247|6451|Toronto

There was an accident at a chemical plant near Milan over thirty years ago--it killed a few souls, and the area has been cordoned of for many years to come. You simply cannot clean toxic waste once it gets into the ground. Sorry.
Another example, which many of us BF2 ppl can relate to:
http://www.dhigroup.com/News/NewsArchiv … ussia.aspx
End of story, basically. You cannot clean it up. Esp. if you're Hu Jintao.

Hope it helps.

I like pie.

2008-06-04 17:04:22

#6

Noobpatty: ʎʇʇɐdqoou; +194|6824|West NY

TSI wrote:
Hope it helps.

Oh don't worry it will

2008-06-04 17:04:48

#7

VicktorVauhn: Member; +319|6863|Southern California

Noobpatty wrote:
Zimmer wrote:
Eg - Oil spills in the ocean, nuclear disasters ( chernobyl ) etc. I would stand for the latter argument, as it's good to bring up points of never actually being able to clean radioactive source and the sort.
Thanks a million...but they can be partially cleaned...but I get your point.

How do you know they can be partially cleaned? Does that mean they no longer pose a threat? How do you know that? Write that down...

I don't see how you say there is no information on the internet about the safety of nuclear power/its impact on the environment? That would include information on cleaning up disasters...

2008-06-04 17:07:29

#8

Noobpatty: ʎʇʇɐdqoou; +194|6824|West NY

VicktorVauhn wrote:
Noobpatty wrote:
Zimmer wrote:
Eg - Oil spills in the ocean, nuclear disasters ( chernobyl ) etc. I would stand for the latter argument, as it's good to bring up points of never actually being able to clean radioactive source and the sort.
Thanks a million...but they can be partially cleaned...but I get your point.
How do you know they can be partially cleaned? Does that mean they no longer pose a threat? How do you know that? Write that down...

I don't see how you say there is no information on the internet about the safety of nuclear power/its impact on the environment? That would include information on cleaning up disasters...

Well what I'm saying here is that the topic is on whether it's safe to build on them once cleaned, where other people's projects are simply explaining the harm other things bring, eg deforestation.

2008-06-04 17:20:26

#9

VicktorVauhn: Member; +319|6863|Southern California

yeah I get the distinction, but a major part of the danger to the environment they pose is the lasting danger AFTER an incident.

Cleaning up has to be taken into consideration as they must plan for the failure. Look into environmental research, I can almost guarentee thats where info on cleanup and its effectiveness.

2008-06-04 17:28:26

#10

Noobpatty: ʎʇʇɐdqoou; +194|6824|West NY

VicktorVauhn wrote:
yeah I get the distinction, but a major part of the danger to the environment they pose is the lasting danger AFTER an incident.

Cleaning up has to be taken into consideration as they must plan for the failure. Look into environmental research, I can almost guarentee thats where info on cleanup and its effectiveness.

Thanks for the help...you could actually confuse this for a thread outside of the junk drawer

2008-06-04 17:40:58

#11

bugz: Fission Mailed; +3,311|6783

I'm doin a presentation on Chernobyl too. If you have 30 min or so, these helped me a lot. Taken from an episode on the Discovery channel.
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6

Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/ebug122

2008-06-04 17:45:08

#12

KEN-JENNINGS: I am all that is MOD!; +2,993|7102|949

Do some research on superfund sites and other disasters mentioned. Don't forget Bhopal!

2008-06-04 18:51:58

#13

Noobpatty: ʎʇʇɐdqoou; +194|6824|West NY

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
Do some research on superfund sites and other disasters mentioned. Don't forget Bhopal!

Bhopal? I'll check it out

BF2S Forums Writing a paper on no information sources?

Zimmer wrote:

Noobpatty wrote:

Zimmer wrote:

TSI wrote:

Noobpatty wrote:

Zimmer wrote:

VicktorVauhn wrote:

Noobpatty wrote:

Zimmer wrote:

VicktorVauhn wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Board footer