HOME  |  NEWS  |  BLOGS  |  MESSAGES  |  FEATURES  |  VIDEOS  |  WEBINARS  |  INDUSTRIES  |  FOCUS ON FUNDAMENTALS
  |  REGISTER  |  LOGIN  |  HELP
<<  <  Page 11/16  >  >>
Totally_Lost
User Rank
Silver
Re: Fukishima a success? Doubtful
Totally_Lost   5/3/2013 2:37:08 PM
NO RATINGS
Ichien52 -- there is a larger list of bad things that happen every year with storms, affecting more people, with higher property damage, over larger economic zones.

The same people that live with huricanes and tornado's every year, are also deathly afraid of once a decade earthquakes in Calif.

We should do the best job possible, within reasonable economic sense and balance, for constructing and locating Nuke facilities.

But at the end of the day, there are worse problems, with higher costs, that mother nature tosses at some population every year.

Deaths from automotive causes are higher, as are costs ... by orders of magnitude ... let's focus on doing Nuke right (within reason) and focus harder on things that make a real difference.

Totally_Lost
User Rank
Silver
Re: Good news for nuclear
Totally_Lost   5/3/2013 2:19:05 PM
NO RATINGS
NightOwl ... the point is that they are not repeating every few days, weeks, or years. If the frequency goes up, then clearly someone is F uping very badly.

The fact that they are rare, and relatively contained, means that the balances of economics and engineering constraints are somewhere close.

If money in the global system needs to be allocated for the common good, then fixing the high death rate of automotive causes, is a MUCH higher priority with a a MUCH higher return on investment.

see the web article inhabitat.com/study-finds-emissions-from-fossil-fuel-burning-vehicles-are-worlds-fastest-growing-cause-of-premature-death/

lchien52
User Rank
Bronze
Fukishima a success? Doubtful
lchien52   5/3/2013 10:27:46 AM
It's hard for me to view Fukushima as anything but a Major C.F.

The earthquake broke primary cooling piping

The Tsunami wiped out power backup

Cooling was lost, three reactors overheated and melted thru the primary containment.

Two years later they stil don't know the exact extent of the damage to the reactor secondary cotainment.

Total loss of 6 reactor units condemned or damaged byond repair. Lost of thousands of square miles of land to conamination. Displacement of tens of thousands of people.

Continued contamnation of the sea due to underground leaks. Buildup of contaminated wastewater and leaks due to inability to clean it fast enough.

Jury rigged cooling is much less safe than it was before the accident.

Unknown long terms effects to health, probably not good.

Unable to secure damaged spent fuel pools.

Management problems and a projected 40-year cleanup that they have yet failed to make a single milestone on time.

Billions of dollars lost.

I can hardly wee anything that would qualify as a success except perhaps for the luck that radiation was carried out to sea instead of back towards higly populated tokyo.

NiteOwl_OvO
User Rank
Gold
Re: Good news for nuclear
NiteOwl_OvO   5/3/2013 10:24:07 AM
Totally_Lost,

You are absolutely right. The Chernobyl and Fukushima plants both performed so well and the problems were so insignificant that both incidents bear repeating. So, I'm sure they will be repeated. Personally, I like glowing in the dark. It makes jogging at night safer. I gave up eating tuna years ago, so no problem there either.

Go nukes!

Totally_Lost
User Rank
Silver
Re: Good news for nuclear
Totally_Lost   5/2/2013 7:28:16 PM
Rob,


World wide civilan deaths from automobiles are typically 1.25M each year. Add to that the several million more expected deaths for emmissions, both during operation, and the full life cycle of source materials and fuels, and it's even a higher staggering number. Add this up for the last 60 years, and we are talking about a half a billion deaths.

World wide civilan deaths from the Nuke industry over the last 60 years (ignoring WWII), are a few tens of thousands including those expected to die in the next 50 years from the two major accidents. In comparison ... an absolutely insignificant number, 0.01% of automotive deaths.

If the point, is to save people ... concentrate on automotive safety, world wide.

The entire screaming match about how unsafe these plants are, is simply making a huge mountain, out of a grain of sand in comparison.

The anit-nuke folks need to have their screaming rights revoked, and told to go make a real difference int he world. It's simply time to stop all this senseless fear mongering by the anti-nuke folks.

We need RESPONSIBLE oversight of both industries, not the same "enviornmentalists" that want to kill both industries.

Again ... if you want to save millions of people ... fix safety problems in cars and trucks. The Nuke industry has an excellent safety record in comparison.

These hypocrites crying wolf, really need to be told to concentrate on other things that will make a real difference. I'm done with their fear mongering. Done with their FUD. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt

I'm an old fashioned, 1970's engineer ... we worry about real problems, including doing a good job at anticipating real problems, and making sure they have minimal impacts. As the paper states, after all the anti-nuke fear mongering, the actual numbers are not that bad. Some engineers did their jobs very well. I'm certain future nuke related engineers will do better, in all their fields.

ab3a
User Rank
Platinum
Re: "winning technology"
ab3a   4/30/2013 5:58:02 PM
I agree, big money concentratd in certain interests tends to warp policies toward their side.

I'm a big fan of decentralized production so that no one place can bring down the grid. But that said, there will always be a certain amount of base load to be kept up. Large Nuclear power plants can be a good clean source to meet that base load. 


Jake Brodsky

NiteOwl_OvO
User Rank
Gold
Re: Nuclear still safer
NiteOwl_OvO   4/30/2013 9:28:49 AM
The critical reviews quoted in that Wikipedia article were written by armchair experts. One implies the studies didn't go far enough and that the death toll may actually be higher. Another criticizes the translated (Russian to English) version for not adhering to western-style publications, which it is not. It also criticizes the publication for being too difficult for the critic to peer-review the supporting documents. Basically, the critic trashed the book because he was unwilling to put forth the effort to actually perform a thorough peer-review. Those critical reviews have little or no value.

curious_device
User Rank
Gold
"winning technology"
curious_device   4/29/2013 11:05:06 PM
I agree that there needs to be a mix of energy technologies, but the USA seems to be stuck in the mode of thinking in terms of "what's the winning technology".  This mentality, along with big-money pushing only for centralized, easily monopolized power sources, creates the kind of heavily biased garbage studies that shape energy policy.

patb2009
User Rank
Gold
Re: World Trade Center
patb2009   4/29/2013 8:55:05 PM
i think we can get most of the way there with cheap solar cheap wind and cheap storage

bills0
User Rank
Iron
Re: Nuclear still safer
bills0   4/29/2013 7:24:56 PM
You apparently believe that all scientists who report or confirm the 4000 number are members of WHO. Not so. There is an interesting survey article on Wikipedia about your source Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment. It is worth a read.

<<  <  Page 11/16  >  >>


Partner Zone
Latest Analysis
Factory floor engineers may soon be able to operate machinery and monitor equipment status simply by tapping their eyeglasses.
GE Aviation not only plans to use 3D printing to mass-produce metal parts for its LEAP jet engine, but it's also developing a separate technology for 3D-printing metal parts used in its other engines.
In this TED presentation, Wayne Cotter, a computer engineer turned standup comic, explains why engineers are natural comedians.
IBM's new SyNAPSE chip makes it possible for computers to both memorize and compute simultaneously.
The “Space Kid,” 11, will be one of the first civilians to have his design manufactured in space by NASA, thanks to the City X Project, which inspires kids to think about new 3D-printed inventions that could be useful for humans living in space.
More:Blogs|News
Design News Webinar Series
9/10/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
7/23/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
7/17/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
6/25/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
Quick Poll
The Continuing Education Center offers engineers an entirely new way to get the education they need to formulate next-generation solutions.
Sep 22 - 26, MCU Software Development – A Step-by-Step Guide (Using a Real Eval Board)
SEMESTERS: 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6


Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.
Next Class: September 30 - October 2
Sponsored by Altera
Learn More   |   Login   |   Archived Classes
Twitter Feed
Design News Twitter Feed
Like Us on Facebook

Sponsored Content

Technology Marketplace

Copyright © 2014 UBM Canon, A UBM company, All rights reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Service