Nuclear Power and Overreaction

I am not dismissing everyones concerns, especially about spent fuel and waste, but the idea that we can't operate these large systems safely is just not so. It's all about the perception of the value of upgrading and maintaining them be more about the intangibles of safety as opposed to a classic cost/benefit analysis of the bottom line.

The post was intended to be a bit controversial, but I perceive that allot of the fear is really rooted in a lack of understanding about the men and design that has kept these reactors from blowing up every day for the last 40 years.

[link to en.wikipedia.org]


you got any better ideas?

this was well known years ago before the PC crowd got into the no nukes arena.

The genie is well out of the bottle folks

Every system we have that contains vast levels of potential energy is exposed to a terrorist attack that would be devastating. The underground convection design does address this issue to some extent in the nuclear containment, but you still have the bunker buster cruise missile that could be used to compromise that.

Your point it rather moot


It is mutual assured destruction now anyway..

Just a matter of if you trust the other guy....and can show him that it is indeed MAD

Events like this have happened throughout earths history. A wave like this would probably obliterate dozens of nuclear power stations, and turn what would be a survivable event in planetary terms into something which would cause the extinction of every species on earth. It's not even a case of "if" it happens, but "when" it happens. Where does that leave your improved safety systems?

If you do nothing to deal with the spent fuel ten years ago there is no need for a giant mythical Tsunami.


Time has run out

Are you serious?

They told us at inception that the chances of a reactor blowing up was in the millions.

In the last 40 years I know of at least 6 that have exploded.

Seems they were VERY wrong in their calculations.

You didn't get what I said.

You don't need multi-million dollar aircraft or smart bombs.

All you would need is about 30 heavily armed men and a hundred odd pounds of demolition charges.

I get what you are saying. The distinction of the possible environmental impacts make this particular system special. My viewpoint though is a calculated risk that we can mitigate the cooling problem. The results of Japan reveal fundamental design flaw in relying on electrical pumps in an electrical generator as a fail safe stop guard.

I yield on the spent fuel issue. No solution has presented itself other than to bury it and wait for technology to catch up. This goes to the heart of the effort since its inception not so much the narrow issue of the cooling and protection of the containment vessel.

Thread: [UPDATED]Dr. Caldicott and others: Nuclear Catastrophe in Japan and You. News and realtime info. (Page 7)

There has to be action taken. Yes we should not "go backwards" and defeat progress, nor should we go forwards unaware of the possible consequences.

Good awareness, OP.