Waiting for Fukushima in this country

[alan1]

Waiting for Fukushima in this country.

I'm curious, how many nuclear power plants in the US are at risk of experiencing both a major earthquake and major tsunami, one right after the other? Or a similar double whammy of natural disasters of the strength that happened in Fukushima?

Probably two out of 60 or so.. I know the one in San Luis Obispo is in a bad place.

One of the mistakes we made in the early 60s was to locate these plants like any other power plants. We know better now.. Don't have to locate the plants in major metro areas.

The fatal flaw in Fukishima was where the back-up generators were located. They flooded. A normal shutdown should be able to occur between the earthquake and the tsunami as long as a power source is present.

There should MOBILE power sources parked OUTSIDE the general area.. This is part of ANY disaster scenario preparation.. The Japanese Navy could have brought in offshore power barges to power those facilities during recovery. So many things SHOULD have been done to reduce the damage at Fukishima that weren't done. The folks in charge (not the ones actually heroically working on site) froze up in the face of the SCOPE of the disaster..

Has SLO ever had an earthquake of the magnitude that occurred in Fukushima? Has SLO ever had a tsunami, ever?

 

[flacaltenn]

I'm curious, how many nuclear power plants in the US are at risk of experiencing both a major earthquake and major tsunami, one right after the other? Or a similar double whammy of natural disasters of the strength that happened in Fukushima?

Probably two out of 60 or so.. I know the one in San Luis Obispo is in a bad place.

One of the mistakes we made in the early 60s was to locate these plants like any other power plants. We know better now.. Don't have to locate the plants in major metro areas.

The fatal flaw in Fukishima was where the back-up generators were located. They flooded. A normal shutdown should be able to occur between the earthquake and the tsunami as long as a power source is present.

There should MOBILE power sources parked OUTSIDE the general area.. This is part of ANY disaster scenario preparation.. The Japanese Navy could have brought in offshore power barges to power those facilities during recovery. So many things SHOULD have been done to reduce the damage at Fukishima that weren't done. The folks in charge (not the ones actually heroically working on site) froze up in the face of the SCOPE of the disaster..

Has SLO ever had an earthquake of the magnitude that occurred in Fukushima? Has SLO ever had a tsunami, ever?

SLO hasn't, but there is a spot 60 miles NE of there currently very active.. As a matter of fact, there hasn't been any tsunami activity on the Mid Cal coast in my lifetime -- I believe.

I'm a HUGE fan of nuclear.. And I've learned to be PAINFULLY honest. And to listen to VALID objections. But I'll go with you on the LIKELIHOOD of a similar event being very tiny at SLO.

 

[alan1]

Probably two out of 60 or so.. I know the one in San Luis Obispo is in a bad place.

One of the mistakes we made in the early 60s was to locate these plants like any other power plants. We know better now.. Don't have to locate the plants in major metro areas.

The fatal flaw in Fukishima was where the back-up generators were located. They flooded. A normal shutdown should be able to occur between the earthquake and the tsunami as long as a power source is present.

There should MOBILE power sources parked OUTSIDE the general area.. This is part of ANY disaster scenario preparation.. The Japanese Navy could have brought in offshore power barges to power those facilities during recovery. So many things SHOULD have been done to reduce the damage at Fukishima that weren't done. The folks in charge (not the ones actually heroically working on site) froze up in the face of the SCOPE of the disaster..

Has SLO ever had an earthquake of the magnitude that occurred in Fukushima? Has SLO ever had a tsunami, ever?

SLO hasn't, but there is a spot 60 miles NE of there currently very active.. As a matter of fact, there hasn't been any tsunami activity on the Mid Cal coast in my lifetime -- I believe.

I'm a HUGE fan of nuclear.. And I've learned to be PAINFULLY honest. And to listen to VALID objections. But I'll go with you on the LIKELIHOOD of a similar event being very tiny at SLO.

Exactly.
There is a portion of decisions that are based upon risk assessment. It is certainly risky to build a nuclear plant near a fault zone, and CA is known for earthquakes. Interestingly enough, the most powerful earthquake in the continental US wasn't anywhere near California (Look up New Madrid earthquake for details).

BTW, if you are familiar with SLO, I'm guessing you are also familiar with Morro Bay. Nice area of the country.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Liberals, always afraid of advanced technology.

They don't want us using oil for anything.

They don't want us using coal for electricity.

They don't want us using nuclear for electricity.

Solar and wind don't even come close to the above energy sources.
Carry on with your idiotic fear-mongering.

I've been reading about solar power and it's a whole lot better than it used to be. Seems to me we should be doing solar and wind and hydro and anything else that's safer than nuclear. And even if he can't provide for ALL our needs, we should use it to provide for as much of our needs as possible.

And even if he can't provide for ALL our needs, we should use it to provide for as much of our needs as possible.

Yes, we need as much expensive, unreliable power that we can get our hands on.
No matter what the damage to our economy.
Forward!

 

[flacaltenn]

Has SLO ever had an earthquake of the magnitude that occurred in Fukushima? Has SLO ever had a tsunami, ever?

SLO hasn't, but there is a spot 60 miles NE of there currently very active.. As a matter of fact, there hasn't been any tsunami activity on the Mid Cal coast in my lifetime -- I believe.

I'm a HUGE fan of nuclear.. And I've learned to be PAINFULLY honest. And to listen to VALID objections. But I'll go with you on the LIKELIHOOD of a similar event being very tiny at SLO.

Exactly.
There is a portion of decisions that are based upon risk assessment. It is certainly risky to build a nuclear plant near a fault zone, and CA is known for earthquakes. Interestingly enough, the most powerful earthquake in the continental US wasn't anywhere near California (Look up New Madrid earthquake for details).

BTW, if you are familiar with SLO, I'm guessing you are also familiar with Morro Bay. Nice area of the country.

I've had a client in SLO for over 15 years. Been there a lot.. Always stay at Pismo Beach because it reminds me of growing up in Florida. You're reminded of the nuke plant as soon as you check into your hotel.. Because there's instructions on the door for evac plans.

That would normally freak out a lot of folks. But I'd live there. Because in California EVERY DOOR you go thru has some warning about dangerous and fatal chemicals that MIGHT be contained inside.. When you bombard people with that much threatening information -- they tend to ignore EVERY POSTING.

Every public door in California has this sign..

Creates jobs ya know !!! (for sign polishers) Imagine that's the last thing you see as they wheel you into the operating room.. What a bunch of morons...

 

[Grandma]

Perry Nuclear Power Plant, North Perry, Ohio - Cleveland Architecture | Examiner.com

Let's see.. Over 30 thirty years of operation and all you got is one on-site fire at a point not vital to plant safety, a couple pump replacements, and an unknown "spike" in radiation that is being investigated (while I presume the plant is still operating isnt it?)

They should get an award...

Old 30 year old coal plants are more radioactive and dangerous than that....

That's ironic that you should post a story about the Perry Nuke Plant. I worked there for a few years back in the late 80s.

Perry is a very well-operated nuke plant, as all U.S. nuke plants are. Just ONE reactor provides enough power for 1.4 million people. Amazing!

Actually I was originally trying to find the reports of all the leaks from the Shippingport nuke joint. Funny how none of those are online. I grew up very near there.

 

[TruthSeeker56]

Let's see.. Over 30 thirty years of operation and all you got is one on-site fire at a point not vital to plant safety, a couple pump replacements, and an unknown "spike" in radiation that is being investigated (while I presume the plant is still operating isnt it?)

They should get an award...

Old 30 year old coal plants are more radioactive and dangerous than that....

That's ironic that you should post a story about the Perry Nuke Plant. I worked there for a few years back in the late 80s.

Perry is a very well-operated nuke plant, as all U.S. nuke plants are. Just ONE reactor provides enough power for 1.4 million people. Amazing!

Actually I was originally trying to find the reports of all the leaks from the Shippingport nuke joint. Funny how none of those are online. I grew up very near there.

The Shippingport Nuke Plant? Wow, that one's been closed down for a LONG time. Small plant, too.

So what sort of "leaks" are you worried about? The plant is probably completely GONE, and any nuclear material has certainly been removed.

Flacal, you are EXACTLY correct about the Fukishima disaster. The emergency diesel generators should have been located on higher ground so they were not in danger of being swamped with water. The complete loss of power doomed any chance of shutting down the nuclear reactors safely.

I will also add that these particular reactors had the very old General Electric Mark I reactor/containment, which are first-generation designs from the 1960s. These reactors were nearing the end of their life cycle, so the Fukishima disaster was pretty much a "perfect storm".