ChrioN
Well-known member
http://edition.cnn.com/ If you haven't turned on the tv yet.
pstamler said:There may be a place for power reactors, but active seismic zones sure aren't it; Japan, California, Missouri. If we use them at all, they should be in seismically-quiet places.
Peace,
Paul
JohnRoberts said:pstamler said:There may be a place for power reactors, but active seismic zones sure aren't it; Japan, California, Missouri. If we use them at all, they should be in seismically-quiet places.
The biggest concern I have with nuclear power plants is control of fissile materials. Modern designs can be made that self quench and don't go all china syndrome when we lose electricity for the cooling system...
come to think of it, how does a power plant with too much (heat) power, not have electricity for cooling pumps?
I'm sure this will add to the chicken little atmosphere around nuclear power here...
hodad said:[...]But a week ago a 30+ foot tsunami and 8.9 earthquake in Japan seemed fairly unlikely as well.[...]
jdbakker said:Not to anyone living in Japan it didn't.
JDB.
jdbakker said:hodad said:[...]But a week ago a 30+ foot tsunami and 8.9 earthquake in Japan seemed fairly unlikely as well.[...]
Not to anyone living in Japan it didn't.
JDB.
[the word tsunami being originally Japanese is a bit of a hint. ......
pstamler said:Okay, I found out why they couldn't use the reactor/power station itself to generate power to run its cooling pumps. It's because the wiring and switching, and perhaps the generators, were damaged by the tsunami. Couple million gallons of salt water flooding the facility...yeah, I can see that.
Peace,
Paul
Enter your email address to join: