nvm

[Edited on May 19, 2013 at 11:19 AM. Reason : df]

5/19/2013 11:19:28 AM

^^^it is my understanding that the Japanese plant situation could have been "avoided" had they had their emergency diesel generators been elevated at a tsunami safe level. Apparently they were not and got flooded out, thus eliminating their means of emergency cooling?

I am not that apprised of their situation completely, so there could have been updates to the situation and I missed them and could be wrong.

hershculez said what I meant when I said "American plants aren't built like Russian plants"


[Edited on May 19, 2013 at 11:24 AM. Reason : ya]

[Edited on May 19, 2013 at 11:25 AM. Reason : ya]

5/19/2013 11:23:14 AM

I wonder what a tsunami-safe level for the North Carolina coast is. I wonder if anyone knows.

Why should utilities be allowed to construct new plants when they apparently lack sufficient funds to maintain their existing fleet or demonstrate the leadership to retire the 1/3 of their fleet which consists of archaic designs known to be dangerous since 1972.

5/19/2013 11:32:05 AM

Brunswick is ~5 miles inland. On the walls of the Brunswick plant are markings that show where the water level would be for various size waves. 20 ft. 25 ft. 30 ft. 50 ft. etc. Their diesels are up high. They have procedures in place deal with those issues. The Japan wave was 48 feet high for reference.

I disagree with your new plant construction comment. We should build the new plants because they are an improved design and their passive cooling systems are amazing. They can handle losing all power for a really long time compared to the current plants. Build enough and the older plants can be retired. Check out this animation on the AP1000: http://www.ap1000.westinghousenuclear.com/ap1000_psrs_pccs.html

Quote :

"I wonder what a tsunami-safe level for the North Carolina coast is. I wonder if anyone knows. Why should utilities be allowed to construct new plants when they apparently lack sufficient funds to maintain their existing fleet or demonstrate the leadership to retire the 1/3 of their fleet which consists of archaic designs known to be dangerous since 1972."

[Edited on May 19, 2013 at 11:44 AM. Reason : df]

5/19/2013 11:43:55 AM

Indeed. But I don't want to pay for it.

They can burn trash in 50 gallon barrels to generate power as far as I'm concerned so long as electricity is cheap and won't kill me. The next generation is screwed anyway; it's time to throw a party in the dining car and merrily ride this train into the ravine.

5/19/2013 12:25:53 PM

You're scared about a tsunami meltdown but aren't scared about the effects of burning trash.

5/19/2013 1:01:01 PM

I love the logic that says we should prevent the building of new and better plants based on 40+ years of knowledge learned from operating our existing ones, because the the existing ones are such alleged death traps. Sooooo, then we have to keep running the existing "death traps".

And "demonstrating leadership" to retire the old plants? You do realize that in order to "demonstrate" that "leadership," these people would be going to prison because they'd be building new plants without federal permits because fucking morons like you haven't allowed a new plant to be built in 30+ years, right?

Tell you what: you like burning shit so much, go stand beside a trash incinerator or a coal plant for 2 days. You'll receive more radiation exposure from that than you would from standing beside one of our "death trap" nuclear plants for 30 years. But hey, burning shit is totally safe, while technology you don't event begin or care to understand must certainly be evil and terrible, right?

5/19/2013 1:22:07 PM

Well obviously we would build the tire-burning facilities in poor counties no one cares about, rather than city-destroying nukes in metropolitan areas. This is where the leadership aspect comes in.

5/19/2013 1:36:14 PM

I'll bet you don't even go outside when that bright burning thingy is in the sky, right? What about when the big white saucer is out?

5/19/2013 1:51:16 PM

To poor Pyotr's credit, most things are safer than driving a car in Russia/Ukraine. He was on duty during the disaster, but I don't know if he died immediately or some time later.

5/19/2013 2:12:06 PM

Did you shit your pants the first time you saw a car?
I'll bet you're really uncomfortable around hand tools, too...

5/19/2013 2:16:21 PM

Quote :

"3 of 11 that containment crack situation is actually a pretty shitty story. They guy that made the final decision to use that water saw technique and not de-tension the entire building was trying to take a shortcut to save 6 hours on their outage schedule. Instead he cost the company a lot of money and a few hundred people lost jobs. Duke is trying to help out the people in that area though which is the least they could do in my opinion."

Not just him, but the people responsible for checking his work too.

5/19/2013 7:17:45 PM