Nuclear nightmare worse than Fukushima could hit US because of ignored risks

MindWars

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2016
42,227
10,743
2,040
The US has underestimated the risks to its nuclear safety as a single nuclear fuel fire could lead to fallout “much greater than Fukushima,” according to a new study. Researches slammed the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for ignoring the potential danger. If spent fuel at one of the dozens of US nuclear sites sets alight, it “could dwarf the horrific
Nuclear nightmare worse than Fukushima could hit US because of ignored risks
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Don't worry they'll just raise the safety levels and everybody will be just fine, msm won't report it so then half the Country won't know anyway. After all they don't want to create panic, oh wait half the Country is so out of it they don't know wtf is going on from one day to the next anyway.
 
Normally, your threads are kind of silly. But this is correct. We have a problem. Many of the rod ponds have as much as five times the rods stored in them as they were designed for. It is a recipe for disaster should something completely unplanned for happen. Such as the near miss in 2011, when the Fort Peck dam spillway came close to washing out. Had that happened, every dam between there and New Orleans on the Missouri and Mississippi rivers would have also failed. They are earth fill, and water over topping them would lead to certain failure. How many Nukes are in the flood plain?
 
So to summarize: an industry that was created in 1953 (commercial nuclear power) and in all that time HAS NOT HAD A SINGLE FATALITY DUE TO NUCLEAR RADIATION is an imminent danger to millions of people.

Is that basically it?

Just for giggles, I will point out that American ratepayers paid BILLIONS AND BILLIONS to fund a safe repository for spent fuel ("nuclear waste") only to have it all pissed away by Harry Reid.

Just sayin'.
 
All it takes is one time, and, as we saw at Chernobyl, a lot of people die, and thousands of acres become uninhabitable. And nuke electricity is damned expensive. Both solar and wind are now far cheaper, with grid scale storage, both are 24/7.
 
U.s. nuke plants have multiple levels of containment...nothing like Chernobel. Our fear of a catastrophic incident is based on two stupid movies, one of which was Godzilla. You don't get that incredible safety record by being careless. Three Mile Island didn't even result in a case of mild indigestion.

Be afraid of something else. Zombie apocalypse, maybe. There's nothing here.
 
Backgrounder on the Three Mile Island Accident

The Three Mile Island Unit 2 (TMI-2) reactor, near Middletown, Pa., partially melted down on March 28, 1979. This was the most serious accident in U.S. commercial nuclear power plant operating history, although its small radioactive releases had no detectable health effects on plant workers or the public. Its aftermath brought about sweeping changes involving emergency response planning, reactor operator training, human factors engineering, radiation protection, and many other areas of nuclear power plant operations. It also caused the NRC to tighten and heighten its regulatory oversight. All of these changes significantly enhanced U.S. reactor safety.

A combination of equipment malfunctions, design-related problems and worker errors led to TMI-2's partial meltdown and very small off-site releases of radioactivity.

NRC: Backgrounder on the Three Mile Island Accident

Sounds like a severe case of indigestion for a lot of people. I suggest that you actually know something about what you are posting about.
 
It is amazing that like 80 % of the nuclear active material is not usable. Imagine, we are forever stuck with 80 % of radioactive poison. Whose idea was it in the first place to build a commercial nuclear plant?
 
Well, when I was a child they said that the nukes would be absolutely failsafe, and produce electricity so cheaply that we would not meter it. They sold the nukes on that basis. And neither turned out to be true.
 
Don't worry they'll just raise the safety levels and everybody will be just fine, msm won't report it so then half the Country won't know anyway. After all they don't want to create panic, oh wait half the Country is so out of it they don't know wtf is going on from one day to the next anyway.

Bad reference, like some ridiculous doomer site knows a anything about risk, let alone the quantification of it? You might as well quote some peak oiler on how horrible low oil p[rices have been as of late, EndOfTimes would be talking about our alien overlords if they hadn't dreamed up this one.
 
THREE MILESTONE ISLAND was the "worst nuclear catastrophe" in U.S. history, and no one even got sick.

Spent nuclear fuel can be re - processed and re - used almost indefinitely the u.s. government CHOSE not to use this proven technology because it can also be used to produce weapons grade material, and we don't want other countries to have it.

We have at least one perfectly safe facility to store spent fuel (WIPP), but we don't use it due to neurotic fears such as that displayed in this thread..
 
THREE MILESTONE ISLAND was the "worst nuclear catastrophe" in U.S. history, and no one even got sick.

Spent nuclear fuel can be re - processed and re - used almost indefinitely the u.s. government CHOSE not to use this proven technology because it can also be used to produce weapons grade material, and we don't want other countries to have it.

We have at least one perfectly safe facility to store spent fuel (WIPP), but we don't use it due to neurotic fears such as that displayed in this thread..
After Fukushima and the close call we had at the Fort Peck damn in 2011, it is not a neurotic fear, it is that acceptance of the reality that there are major risks in our present nukes.
 
It is amazing that like 80 % of the nuclear active material is not usable. Imagine, we are forever stuck with 80 % of radioactive poison. Whose idea was it in the first place to build a commercial nuclear plant?
No, we are "stuck" because President Peanuthead banned reprocessing spent fuel. Doing so (as is done in Europe) cuts waste by 50-70%. And, of course, there are new reactors that make no waste...in fact, there are new reactor designs that are fueled by and CONSUME the waste!
 

Forum List

Back
Top