On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 15:13:57 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 13:50:46 -0400, wrote:


If it were a closed system... lake water flows into the plant, cools
the reactor, then flows down hill, it could generate enough energy
(with a boost from the heat produced) to create enough power to pump
some of the water back to the lake. The water would be contaminated,
but it would be better than a meltdown.

I would have the plant very close to the lake... just down hill from
it.

The problem is most lakes are at the bottom of the hill. That is why
survival training teaches you, when in doubt, walk down hill. That is
where the water is and people congregate around the water.

It's a tough problem... we do have lakes formed by dams. Those spill
into rivers. There are several around here.

Hold on there.
First you want to contaminate a lake with radioactivity.
Then you want to put a nuclear reactor near a dam.
Are you by any chance Japanese?

Heh... well, I was thinking of the lake as a last resort, and since it
would likely have to have a dam... hmm... it would be nice to find a
solution to the safety issue, but I guess that's not it. Good
points.

I believe the current design that had the problem had the spent rods
pool above the reactor, and I've heard some speculation that the
reason was having a reserve pool of water... doesn't really make much
sense, since the rods get hot also.

Where is fusion when we need it...