|
Nuclear power anyone??
On 3/16/11 12:26 AM, I_am_Tosk wrote:
In , says... 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. It "seems to you"?? Holy crap, watch a newscast before you make such a stupid statement. You don't care about Florida, you don't care to even inform yourself at all about the situation in Nippon, you just blather on about Righties this and Conservatives that, and wait for someone to follow you down your yellow brick road.. Greg is catching on, and from what we have learned about you lately, I am sure once he stops playing you will move along, change your handle and infect some other group... Pffft... Dork.. There's an idea, snotty...change your handle (again) and infect some other group. |
Nuclear power anyone??
On 3/16/11 12:31 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 15/03/2011 7:05 PM, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:43:27 -0600, wrote: You stupid ****! Do you realize that in the U.S. the standard design for nuke plants for sunamis, earthquakes, flood, etc. is to use a 10,000 year event span? So does Japan claim the same. You trust these *******s to tll the truth? I have some beach front land for sale cheap too... You probably should not put a nuke plant there. If it was 25 miles up the river it would not be knocked out by a tsunami. BTW has there EVER been a tsunami in the Atlantic? Keep in mind the Japanese nuke facility was designed by non-other than General Electric of the USA. So how many of these problematic reactors are there? Probably more than a few utility companies wanting to ignore this imutable fact. How many of these reactors ARE in your back yard? The nukes in our neighborhood were designed by Combustion Engineering, now owned by Westinghouse. They're close to 40 years old. |
Nuclear power anyone??
On 3/16/2011 12:26 AM, I_am_Tosk wrote:
In , says... 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. It "seems to you"?? Holy crap, watch a newscast before you make such a stupid statement. You don't care about Florida, you don't care to even inform yourself at all about the situation in Nippon, you just blather on about Righties this and Conservatives that, and wait for someone to follow you down your yellow brick road.. Greg is catching on, and from what we have learned about you lately, I am sure once he stops playing you will move along, change your handle and infect some other group... Pffft... Dork.. She's been spotted over on rec.boats cruising using the handle Jessica B. What a dope. |
Nuclear power anyone??
On 3/16/2011 8:53 AM, Ernie wrote:
On 3/16/2011 12:26 AM, I_am_Tosk wrote: In , says... 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. It "seems to you"?? Holy crap, watch a newscast before you make such a stupid statement. You don't care about Florida, you don't care to even inform yourself at all about the situation in Nippon, you just blather on about Righties this and Conservatives that, and wait for someone to follow you down your yellow brick road.. Greg is catching on, and from what we have learned about you lately, I am sure once he stops playing you will move along, change your handle and infect some other group... Pffft... Dork.. She's been spotted over on rec.boats cruising using the handle Jessica B. What a dope. I've been trying to "spot" a decent boating-related post from you. Can't seem to find any. So, whose sock puppet are you? |
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. |
Nuclear power anyone??
|
Nuclear power anyone??
In article , payer3389
@mypacks.net says... On 3/15/11 9:05 PM, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:43:27 -0600, wrote: You stupid ****! Do you realize that in the U.S. the standard design for nuke plants for sunamis, earthquakes, flood, etc. is to use a 10,000 year event span? So does Japan claim the same. You trust these *******s to tll the truth? I have some beach front land for sale cheap too... You probably should not put a nuke plant there. If it was 25 miles up the river it would not be knocked out by a tsunami. BTW has there EVER been a tsunami in the Atlantic? Portugal, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands have experienced them. There probably have been other tsunamis in the Atlantic. Maybe when your father made his trans-Atlantic trip in a 22' runabout?? |
Nuclear power anyone??
In article ,
says... On 3/16/11 12:31 AM, Canuck57 wrote: On 15/03/2011 7:05 PM, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:43:27 -0600, wrote: You stupid ****! Do you realize that in the U.S. the standard design for nuke plants for sunamis, earthquakes, flood, etc. is to use a 10,000 year event span? So does Japan claim the same. You trust these *******s to tll the truth? I have some beach front land for sale cheap too... You probably should not put a nuke plant there. If it was 25 miles up the river it would not be knocked out by a tsunami. BTW has there EVER been a tsunami in the Atlantic? Keep in mind the Japanese nuke facility was designed by non-other than General Electric of the USA. So how many of these problematic reactors are there? Probably more than a few utility companies wanting to ignore this imutable fact. How many of these reactors ARE in your back yard? The nukes in our neighborhood were designed by Combustion Engineering, now owned by Westinghouse. They're close to 40 years old. Ooops, you said yesterday that all were built by GE..... |
Nuclear power anyone??
On 3/16/11 9:43 AM, paul@byc wrote:
On 3/16/2011 8:53 AM, Ernie wrote: On 3/16/2011 12:26 AM, I_am_Tosk wrote: In , says... 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. It "seems to you"?? Holy crap, watch a newscast before you make such a stupid statement. You don't care about Florida, you don't care to even inform yourself at all about the situation in Nippon, you just blather on about Righties this and Conservatives that, and wait for someone to follow you down your yellow brick road.. Greg is catching on, and from what we have learned about you lately, I am sure once he stops playing you will move along, change your handle and infect some other group... Pffft... Dork.. She's been spotted over on rec.boats cruising using the handle Jessica B. What a dope. I've been trying to "spot" a decent boating-related post from you. Can't seem to find any. So, whose sock puppet are you? Paul, I've been trying to "spot" a decent boating-related post from you. Can't seem to find any. So, whose sock puppet are you? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:24 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com