| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#2
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Nuclear power anyone??
On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 21:10:12 -0400, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:42:48 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 16:11:19 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 12:37:00 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 02:19:14 -0400, Wayne.B wrote: On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 20:35:01 -0400, wrote: I haven't been opposed to nuclear power. I live about 20 miles from one. But this latest incident in Japan sure gives one pause. I think the significant thing is that the problem wasn't the 9.0 earthquake, it was the tsunami. That makes most of the US reactors somewhat immune to the biggest problem. It does highlight how vulnerable the cooling systems are to unexpected second order effects. The Japanese had diesel generators for backup power and then the diesels got knocked out by the tsunami. There are a lot of other things that can knock out diesel generators however. The track record of standby diesels performing reliably in an emergency is spotty at best. It takes an extremely rigorous maintenance and testing regime starting with fuel storage, filtration practices, etc. Why not just put a big water tank on top of the building... then all you need is gravity. The size of the tank. How big would it have to be? Seems like you could build a pretty big one that would work for at least some period of time... long enough to get the backup online. They have been pumping sea water into those reactors for days using big barge mounted pumps and it is still hot. You are talking about a good sized lake, not a tank. Seems to me that if the water was released in a controlled fashion at the beginning of the problem, there wouldn't be a requirement for that vast an amount of water. |
|
#3
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nuclear power anyone??
On 15/03/2011 7:10 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:42:48 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 16:11:19 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 12:37:00 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 02:19:14 -0400, Wayne.B wrote: On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 20:35:01 -0400, wrote: I haven't been opposed to nuclear power. I live about 20 miles from one. But this latest incident in Japan sure gives one pause. I think the significant thing is that the problem wasn't the 9.0 earthquake, it was the tsunami. That makes most of the US reactors somewhat immune to the biggest problem. It does highlight how vulnerable the cooling systems are to unexpected second order effects. The Japanese had diesel generators for backup power and then the diesels got knocked out by the tsunami. There are a lot of other things that can knock out diesel generators however. The track record of standby diesels performing reliably in an emergency is spotty at best. It takes an extremely rigorous maintenance and testing regime starting with fuel storage, filtration practices, etc. Why not just put a big water tank on top of the building... then all you need is gravity. The size of the tank. How big would it have to be? Seems like you could build a pretty big one that would work for at least some period of time... long enough to get the backup online. They have been pumping sea water into those reactors for days using big barge mounted pumps and it is still hot. You are talking about a good sized lake, not a tank. And the drain off is truly hot water in more ways than one. Massive polution to do this. |
|
#4
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nuclear power anyone??
In article ,
says... On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 12:37:00 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 02:19:14 -0400, Wayne.B wrote: On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 20:35:01 -0400, wrote: I haven't been opposed to nuclear power. I live about 20 miles from one. But this latest incident in Japan sure gives one pause. I think the significant thing is that the problem wasn't the 9.0 earthquake, it was the tsunami. That makes most of the US reactors somewhat immune to the biggest problem. It does highlight how vulnerable the cooling systems are to unexpected second order effects. The Japanese had diesel generators for backup power and then the diesels got knocked out by the tsunami. There are a lot of other things that can knock out diesel generators however. The track record of standby diesels performing reliably in an emergency is spotty at best. It takes an extremely rigorous maintenance and testing regime starting with fuel storage, filtration practices, etc. Why not just put a big water tank on top of the building... then all you need is gravity. The size of the tank. And the weight. |
|
#5
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nuclear power anyone??
|
|
#6
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nuclear power anyone??
On 15/03/2011 12:19 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 20:35:01 -0400, wrote: I haven't been opposed to nuclear power. I live about 20 miles from one. But this latest incident in Japan sure gives one pause. I think the significant thing is that the problem wasn't the 9.0 earthquake, it was the tsunami. That makes most of the US reactors somewhat immune to the biggest problem. It does highlight how vulnerable the cooling systems are to unexpected second order effects. The Japanese had diesel generators for backup power and then the diesels got knocked out by the tsunami. There are a lot of other things that can knock out diesel generators however. The track record of standby diesels performing reliably in an emergency is spotty at best. It takes an extremely rigorous maintenance and testing regime starting with fuel storage, filtration practices, etc. All reactors should and can be designed in a way they can remove core elements and stop the reaction. Why were these 4 reactors not designed this way? Cheap design? Poor engineering? How many more like it are out there? |
|
#7
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nuclear power anyone??
"Canuck57" wrote in message ...
On 15/03/2011 12:19 AM, Wayne.B wrote: On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 20:35:01 -0400, wrote: I haven't been opposed to nuclear power. I live about 20 miles from one. But this latest incident in Japan sure gives one pause. I think the significant thing is that the problem wasn't the 9.0 earthquake, it was the tsunami. That makes most of the US reactors somewhat immune to the biggest problem. It does highlight how vulnerable the cooling systems are to unexpected second order effects. The Japanese had diesel generators for backup power and then the diesels got knocked out by the tsunami. There are a lot of other things that can knock out diesel generators however. The track record of standby diesels performing reliably in an emergency is spotty at best. It takes an extremely rigorous maintenance and testing regime starting with fuel storage, filtration practices, etc. All reactors should and can be designed in a way they can remove core elements and stop the reaction. Why were these 4 reactors not designed this way? Cheap design? Poor engineering? How many more like it are out there? Reply: Old reactor. Lots of changes in the last 20-40 years. Quake and Tsunami kill 10-10,000 and there is more hype about the radiation releases at the plant and the danger that 10 people may get cancer. The media is a large problem. What has been released is no high level stuff. Coal mining and power plants release probably that much a week from the Radon gas. Is a disaster, but the newer designs prevent a lot of these problems. We have not build a new plant in the US is at least 20 years. France builds all plants exactly the same regards layout and controls. Trained in one plant, can work in any plant. Cost is cheaper as the design is reused. Any design problems can be addressed equally across the system. How the hell you going to run all those Tesla cars and other electric vehicles the government wants us to drive? |
|
#8
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nuclear power anyone??
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 11:09:10 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote: "Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 15/03/2011 12:19 AM, Wayne.B wrote: On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 20:35:01 -0400, wrote: I haven't been opposed to nuclear power. I live about 20 miles from one. But this latest incident in Japan sure gives one pause. I think the significant thing is that the problem wasn't the 9.0 earthquake, it was the tsunami. That makes most of the US reactors somewhat immune to the biggest problem. It does highlight how vulnerable the cooling systems are to unexpected second order effects. The Japanese had diesel generators for backup power and then the diesels got knocked out by the tsunami. There are a lot of other things that can knock out diesel generators however. The track record of standby diesels performing reliably in an emergency is spotty at best. It takes an extremely rigorous maintenance and testing regime starting with fuel storage, filtration practices, etc. All reactors should and can be designed in a way they can remove core elements and stop the reaction. Why were these 4 reactors not designed this way? Cheap design? Poor engineering? How many more like it are out there? Reply: Old reactor. Lots of changes in the last 20-40 years. Quake and Tsunami kill 10-10,000 and there is more hype about the radiation releases at the plant and the danger that 10 people may get cancer. The media is a large problem. What has been released is no high level stuff. Coal mining and power plants release probably that much a week from the Radon gas. Is a disaster, but the newer designs prevent a lot of these problems. We have not build a new plant in the US is at least 20 years. France builds all plants exactly the same regards layout and controls. Trained in one plant, can work in any plant. Cost is cheaper as the design is reused. Any design problems can be addressed equally across the system. How the hell you going to run all those Tesla cars and other electric vehicles the government wants us to drive? As of just a few minutes ago, the authorities in Japan are using fire hoses to try and cool the plants. According to the BBC, it's becoming more and more a desperate operation. |
|
#9
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nuclear power anyone??
On 16/03/2011 12:09 PM, Califbill wrote:
"Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 15/03/2011 12:19 AM, Wayne.B wrote: On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 20:35:01 -0400, wrote: I haven't been opposed to nuclear power. I live about 20 miles from one. But this latest incident in Japan sure gives one pause. I think the significant thing is that the problem wasn't the 9.0 earthquake, it was the tsunami. That makes most of the US reactors somewhat immune to the biggest problem. It does highlight how vulnerable the cooling systems are to unexpected second order effects. The Japanese had diesel generators for backup power and then the diesels got knocked out by the tsunami. There are a lot of other things that can knock out diesel generators however. The track record of standby diesels performing reliably in an emergency is spotty at best. It takes an extremely rigorous maintenance and testing regime starting with fuel storage, filtration practices, etc. All reactors should and can be designed in a way they can remove core elements and stop the reaction. Why were these 4 reactors not designed this way? Cheap design? Poor engineering? How many more like it are out there? Reply: Old reactor. Lots of changes in the last 20-40 years. Quake and Tsunami kill 10-10,000 and there is more hype about the radiation releases at the plant and the danger that 10 people may get cancer. The media is a large problem. What has been released is no high level stuff. Coal mining and power plants release probably that much a week from the Radon gas. Is a disaster, but the newer designs prevent a lot of these problems. We have not build a new plant in the US is at least 20 years. France builds all plants exactly the same regards layout and controls. Trained in one plant, can work in any plant. Cost is cheaper as the design is reused. Any design problems can be addressed equally across the system. How the hell you going to run all those Tesla cars and other electric vehicles the government wants us to drive? Agreed. But then who is forcing American companies (and Chinese/Tiawan/Japan) to upgrade these plants? Or do these utilities run them until they leak? Hey, lots of American leaks too... although not as bad as what Japan just did. But my point is who is going to get the US ones up to date or just ignore it? |
|
#10
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nuclear power anyone??
In article ,
says... On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 20:35:01 -0400, wrote: On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 18:56:26 -0400, Harryk wrote: On 3/14/11 6:48 PM, True North wrote: Was that you, Johnny.... always preaching about the benefits of nuclear power? Good I guess, as long as you don't have an earthquake. I haven't been opposed to nuclear power. I live about 20 miles from one. But this latest incident in Japan sure gives one pause. I think the significant thing is that the problem wasn't the 9.0 earthquake, it was the tsunami. That makes most of the US reactors somewhat immune to the biggest problem. Except the one 5 miles from my house..... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brunswi...rating_Station Looks like a GE plant. I would consider moving. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Thank you Obama, for Nuclear Power! | General | |||
| We're behind France in nuclear power and... | General | |||
| Repugs to “go nuclear” | General | |||
| Nuclear power boat | Power Boat Racing | |||
Hybrid Mode
