CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 2275
PostPosted: Thu May 03, 2007 2:45 pm
 


Should nuclear bombs be developed for peacefull purposes such as canal construction or mining. We could reduce Alberta's labor demand and carbon emmissions if nuclear ecplosions were used in the Athabaska for instance.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 19928
PostPosted: Thu May 03, 2007 3:07 pm
 


Except nuclear explosions have this nasty habit of irradiating the land upon which they're detonated making the land virtually uninhabitable for a good century.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 14063
PostPosted: Thu May 03, 2007 3:11 pm
 


Weapons of Mass Construction?


Offline
Forum Elite
Forum Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 1240
PostPosted: Thu May 03, 2007 6:43 pm
 


Well, you have the radiation problem. However, if you used fusion warheads, the radiation wouldn't be as bad. And the explosion materials used don't emit carbon dioxide. They emit water vapor and nitrogen oxide.

I am quite surprised that there hasn't been automation up in Canada. I know there are like 100 robotic miners that mine 1/3 of US coal (Modern Marvels).





PostPosted: Thu May 03, 2007 6:51 pm
 


dog77_1999 dog77_1999:
Well, you have the radiation problem. However, if you used fusion warheads, the radiation wouldn't be as bad. And the explosion materials used don't emit carbon dioxide. They emit water vapor and nitrogen oxide.

I am quite surprised that there hasn't been automation up in Canada. I know there are like 100 robotic miners that mine 1/3 of US coal (Modern Marvels).
Allmost all of our coal mines are open pit strip mines,they do use robots for other underground mining here,not sure where but saw it on discovery channel.


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 2275
PostPosted: Thu May 03, 2007 7:25 pm
 


$1:
nitrogen oxide


Oh crap, that could be problem, unless we reduce carbom emiosions be 3800%, which I doubt.

$1:
Allmost all of our coal mines are open pit strip mines,they do use robots for other underground mining here,not sure where but saw it on discovery channel.


Open pit mines do not have the risk of cavins so miners make less and the mines are able to use bigger machines which in many ways is the same as automation.





PostPosted: Thu May 03, 2007 7:30 pm
 


Knoss Knoss:
$1:
nitrogen oxide


Oh crap, that could be problem, unless we reduce carbom emiosions be 3800%, which I doubt.

$1:
Allmost all of our coal mines are open pit strip mines,they do use robots for other underground mining here,not sure where but saw it on discovery channel.


Open pit mines do not have the risk of cavins so miners make less and the mines are able to use bigger machines which in many ways is the same as automation.


Yup,I used to run the worlds largest loader loading the worlds largest rock trucks.The miners make as much as or more then the guys did underground before they closed them all down here.

Used to like it when the satelite gps dispatch system would crash,so much for automation. :wink:


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
Profile
Posts: 5737
PostPosted: Thu May 03, 2007 8:30 pm
 


Actually it would be very logical, pollution wise, to fusion Bomb(H-bomb) INDIA/CHINA into oblivion. The fallout risk would be minimal compared to the elimination of all their polution.


Offline
Forum Elite
Forum Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 1240
PostPosted: Thu May 03, 2007 8:58 pm
 


sasquatch2 sasquatch2:
Actually it would be very logical, pollution wise, to fusion Bomb(H-bomb) INDIA/CHINA into oblivion. The fallout risk would be minimal compared to the elimination of all their polution.


Why stop with them? If we go ahead and wipe humanity off the globe, I will guarentee we will meet the Kyoto deadline...and then some. :D


Offline
Forum Elite
Forum Elite


GROUP_AVATAR
Profile
Posts: 1342
PostPosted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 8:16 am
 


Blue_Nose Blue_Nose:
Weapons of Mass Construction?
ROTFL ROTFL


Offline
Active Member
Active Member
Profile
Posts: 113
PostPosted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 9:07 am
 


xerxes xerxes:
Except nuclear explosions have this nasty habit of irradiating the land upon which they're detonated making the land virtually uninhabitable for a good century.


A) Depends on the bomb design.
B) Depends on how deep/shallow/low/high the explosion is.
C) Hiroshima and Nagasaki are both inhabited to today.


Offline
Forum Elite
Forum Elite
 Toronto Maple Leafs
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 1405
PostPosted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 9:34 am
 


Russia tried that during the 1960s. I saw it on a Nature of Things special on Nuclear weapons a few years back. They would plant the bomb deep down and blow it to make lakes and canals.

If they used that fungus that is living off the radiation in Chernobyl it may have less of an impact. But still, nuclear weapons do have that tendancy to be nasty.


Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 3152
PostPosted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 9:49 am
 


Only a Canadian could come up with the idea of constructing nuclear bombs for "peaceful purposes."


Offline
Forum Elite
Forum Elite
 Toronto Maple Leafs
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 1405
PostPosted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 9:50 am
 


It wasn't us, it was those sneaky Russians I swear.


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 2275
PostPosted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 9:19 pm
 


$1:
Only a Canadian could come up with the idea of constructing nuclear bombs for "peaceful purposes."


What about Ike?


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.