Design flaw apparently well known in nuclear reactors

Ravi

Diamond Member
Feb 27, 2008
90,899
14,005
2,205
Hating Hatters
The warnings were stark and issued repeatedly as far back as 1972: If the cooling systems ever failed at a Mark 1 nuclear reactor, the primary containment vessel surrounding the reactor would probably burst as the fuel rods inside overheated. Dangerous radiation would spew into the environment.
Now, with one Mark 1 containment vessel damaged at the embattled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant and other vessels there under severe strain, the weaknesses of the design — developed in the 1960s by General Electric — could be contributing to the unfolding catastrophe.



http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/16/world/asia/16contain.html
 
It takes 8-10 years in the US, to get approval to upgrade these plants. 30 years and running now, to get to build any new ones. It's silly and it's all based on fear and ignorance.

Had the Japanese had their backup generators roof mounted or on a platforms 20 feet or so up, they would have survived this disaster with little or no problems with their nuclear plants.

The Gen3 reactors they won't let us build don't even use water for cooling, they use liquid sodium. They also have design advances making them much safer, and even more efficient than the Gen1 plants we have.

There's also these, can't use them either: Nuclear Battery
 
It takes 8-10 years in the US, to get approval to upgrade these plants. 30 years and running now, to get to build any new ones. It's silly and it's all based on fear and ignorance.

Had the Japanese had their backup generators roof mounted or on a platforms 20 feet or so up, they would have survived this disaster with little or no problems with their nuclear plants.

The Gen3 reactors they won't let us build don't even use water for cooling, they use liquid sodium. They also have design advances making them much safer, and even more efficient than the Gen1 plants we have.

There's also these, can't use them either: Nuclear Battery
The tsunami was reportedly 33 feet high so I'm not sure how being on a roof 20 in the air would do any good.
 
It takes 8-10 years in the US, to get approval to upgrade these plants. 30 years and running now, to get to build any new ones. It's silly and it's all based on fear and ignorance.

Had the Japanese had their backup generators roof mounted or on a platforms 20 feet or so up, they would have survived this disaster with little or no problems with their nuclear plants.

The Gen3 reactors they won't let us build don't even use water for cooling, they use liquid sodium. They also have design advances making them much safer, and even more efficient than the Gen1 plants we have.

There's also these, can't use them either: Nuclear Battery
The tsunami was reportedly 33 feet high so I'm not sure how being on a roof 20 in the air would do any good.
It wasn't 33 feet high all over. The plant was already 20 feet or so above the rest of the buildings in the area. That's why those are gone, and the plant still stands.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top