Sandy Showed Nuke Plants' Vulnerability

[Pray To Jesus]

is ok lets run the old plants to the ground and wait for another act of god

we'll fix the problem after it's killed a couple million people, heck we're overpopulated anyways

 

[QuantumPion]

Is it not the case that if humans die, these nuke plants would eventually melt down and destroy all life on Earth? Or am I nuts? That's a disturbing thought that our species kills everything else as it dies off.

No, that is absolutely ludicrous. That is an irrational hollywood movie inspired fear of radiation.

 

[Steeplerot]

No, that is absolutely ludicrous. That is an irrational hollywood movie inspired fear of radiation.

Tell that to the Japanese whose childrens thyroids are swelling.

36% of Fukushima children have abnormal thyroid growths: study

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/...shima-japan-children-have-abnormal-thyroid-gr

The Sixth Report of Fukushima Prefecture Health Management Survey, released in April, included examinations of 38,114 children, of whom 35.3 percent - some 13,460 children - were found to have cysts or nodules of up to 5 mm (0.197 inches) on their thyroids.

A further 0.5 percent, totalling 186 youngsters, had nodules larger than 5.1 mm (0.2 inches).
"Yes, 35.8 percent of children in the study have lumps or cysts, but this is not the same as cancer," said Naomi Takagi, an associate professor at Fukushima University Medical School Hospital, which administered the tests.




You folks are utterly on the wrong side of history -and science. For what? To uphold a corrupt taxpayer sucking industry shrouded in secrecy and wracked by endless scandal/disasters?

So very "conservative" of you.

I hope you do not have children, you are a very easily led/naive person.

Annya's story - a Chernobyl legacy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URpQcDZ2RGk

 

[QuantumPion]

"We do not know that cause of this, but it is hard to believe that is due to the effects of radiation," she said. "This is an early test and we will only see the effects of radiation exposure after four or five years."

Good job not reading your own source before posting it moron.

edit: haha - I see you did read it and you edited out the part I just quoted. Nice try there buddy.

Besides, how many children have abnormal thyroid growth every else around the world? There is no indication as to the normal occurrence rate.

And besides besides, how does some children having abnormal thyroid growth = the end of all life on the planet?

 

[Steeplerot]

And besides besides, how does some children having abnormal thyroid growth = the end of all life on the planet?

These children have classic examples of what happened across the Ukraine and Belarus. Maybe you should learn a bit about the real world consequences of what you support.

The first part of a population to show signs of contamination are children, Iodine 131 is absorbed like a sponge in young bodies who have not built up a supply of regular iodine throughout their lifetimes.

 

[mect]

Tell that to the Japanese whose childrens thyroids are swelling.

36% of Fukushima children have abnormal thyroid growths: study

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/...shima-japan-children-have-abnormal-thyroid-gr

The Sixth Report of Fukushima Prefecture Health Management Survey, released in April, included examinations of 38,114 children, of whom 35.3 percent - some 13,460 children - were found to have cysts or nodules of up to 5 mm (0.197 inches) on their thyroids.

A further 0.5 percent, totalling 186 youngsters, had nodules larger than 5.1 mm (0.2 inches).
"Yes, 35.8 percent of children in the study have lumps or cysts, but this is not the same as cancer," said Naomi Takagi, an associate professor at Fukushima University Medical School Hospital, which administered the tests.




You folks are utterly on the wrong side of history -and science. For what? To uphold a corrupt taxpayer sucking industry shrouded in secrecy and wracked by endless scandal/disasters?

So very "conservative" of you.

I hope you do not have children, you are a very easily led/naive person.

Annya's story - a Chernobyl legacy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URpQcDZ2RGk

From your own link:
"We do not know that cause of this, but it is hard to believe that is due to the effects of radiation," Takagi added. "This is an early test and we will only see the effects of radiation exposure after four or five years."

 

[Steeplerot]

From your own link:
"We do not know that cause of this, but it is hard to believe that is due to the effects of radiation," Takagi added. "This is an early test and we will only see the effects of radiation exposure after four or five years."

Saying you are exposed in Japan makes you a social outcast immediately.

They are very wary of admitting it as literally half of Japan would be shunned.

A not very well known issue in America: hibakusha

It's not one of the Japanese cultures highpoints to be frank.

Hibakusha and their children were (and still are) victims of severe discrimination due to lack of knowledge about the consequences of radiation sickness, which people believed to be hereditary or even contagious.


There is considerable discrimination in Japan against the hibakusha. It is frequently extended toward their children as well: socially as well as economically. "Not only hibakusha, but their children, are refused employment," says Mr. Kito. "There are many among them who do not want it known that they are hibakusha."

We have a big problem here, the US doesn't want to deal with the fact that they sold half-assed faulty plants (the GE MKI) they knew would shit out the bottom. And the problem mentioned above in Japan.

 

[SparkyJJO]

Obviously the answer is to shut down all nuclear plants right away. Obviously.

/sarcasm

I see a lot of fear mongering from those who have no clue how a nuclear plant actually operates inside. I'll bet most everyone here who is freaked out about nuclear plants has never stepped foot in one.

When solar or wind turns a countryside into a wasteland let us know.

Oh they easily could, since it would take an entire countryside turned into windmills and/or panels to come close to the power output of a nuclear plant. Very low energy density those things are.

 

[Paratus]

Which is a good sign that you need to look again.

I've worked in oil and gas, have family that did nuclear safety work for naval reactors, and I now do solar power for NASA. I've looked at them all.

 

[Steeplerot]

Oh they easily could, since it would take an entire countryside turned into windmills and/or panels to come close to the power output of a nuclear plant.

Yet Germany produces far more then many reactors worth of wind/solar smashing records this summer and just builds them bigger and more.

No wasteland, and people get paid for generation instead of pissing taxpayer money away cleaning up messes/supporting a unprofitable dangerous 20th century cold war technology that never could live up to it's lofty goals/own PR.

Large scale/centralized energy generation is 19/20th century tech. Ditch all of them. Use nuke power for applications where you can build containment that is safe. (as I mentioned subs and medical isotope reactors)

The USA is being left in the dust thanks to corruption like this by both parties.

 

[Throckmorton]

No, that is absolutely ludicrous. That is an irrational hollywood movie inspired fear of radiation.

So then what happens?

 

[Steeplerot]

I see a lot of fear mongering from those who have no clue how a nuclear plant actually operates inside.

Actually, I could go on all night about the workings of a plant. Trust me, I have plenty of coffee on hand. So go ahead, "educate me".

Pathetic when you guys accuse someone of "fearmongering" it just goes to show you have no clue about the subject with a even handed respect.

You folks repeat the same shit over and over. It's like talking to folks who thought the horse and buggy was the end all be all tech because gas stations/refineries were unthinkable back when.

Try to use your head before you accuse others of fearmongering, the last thing I want to read is stuff like the inevitable cesium in pacific tuna.

I got called every name in the book for suggesting bio accumulation back when it happened also.

Yet, the science is right there for all to see, and the consequences read like a textbook as it plays out.

 

[Tylanner]

During the storm, the plant, along with every other nuclear plant, has two priorities, get to cold shutdown and maintain fuel pool level and temp. Two parameters that everyone at the plant knows is time to boil in the fuel pool and time to boil in the reactor cavity.

I responded to the station at the height of the storm along with our full Emergency Team. Water levels were high during the storm surge, but, contrary to the title of this thread, this nuke plant proved the integrity of its structures and systems and was able to perform as designed. We were prepared to cool the fuel pool by several standard methods(not firefighting equipment) should all the intake pumps have been lost.

Oyster Creek is designed to certain Risk standards. Consequence x Probability. Flooding and Fire account for a large portion of that risk. We cannot build a nuclear plant with zero probability of a release but the industry spends an incredible amount of time and resources each day to ensure that they minimize risk.

As far as sabotage or terrorism threats. Tons upon Tons of cement and earth and ouchy fences protect our nations plants and the employee screening is very stringent.

I highly doubt that the spent fuel pool has open air access to the rest of the facility.

That would be a hilariously bad safety oversight.

Also, they fail to mention that Oyster Creek is literally the oldest US plant. Modern (Gen III+) plants can passively cool all of their systems without any power or human intervention.

Our fuel pool is open to the top floor of our reactor building. On any normal day I can access the refuel floor and look down into the water and see the top of the spent fuel, all while acquired zero radiation dose. Water has magnificent shielding properties and we maintain the water level 25 feet above the top of the fuel. Fukushima is driving many changes for maintaining spent fuel pool water inventory. We have a new 2000GPM diesel pump with an ungodly length of hose to account for nearly any situation. Throughout sandy we saw no changes in water level or temperature in the spent fuel pool.

 

[Steeplerot]

During the storm, the plant, along with every other nuclear plant, has two priorities, get to cold shutdown and maintain fuel pool level and temp. Two parameters that everyone at the plant knows is time to boil in the fuel pool and time to boil in the reactor cavity.

I responded to the station at the height of the storm along with our full Emergency Team. Water levels were high during the storm surge, but, contrary to the title of this thread, this nuke plant proved the integrity of its structures and systems and was able to perform as designed. We were prepared to cool the fuel pool by several standard methods(not firefighting equipment) should all the intake pumps have been lost.

Oyster Creek is designed to certain Risk standards. Consequence x Probability. Flooding and Fire account for a large portion of that risk. We cannot build a nuclear plant with zero probability of a release but the industry spends an incredible amount of time and resources each day to ensure that they minimize risk.

As far as sabotage or terrorism threats. Tons upon Tons of cement and earth and ouchy fences protect our nations plants and the employee screening is very stringent.



Our fuel pool is open to the top floor of our reactor building. On any normal day I can access the refuel floor and look down into the water and see the top of the spent fuel, all while acquired zero radiation dose. Water has magnificent shielding properties and we maintain the water level 25 feet above the top of the fuel. Fukushima is driving many changes for maintaining spent fuel pool water inventory. We have a new 2000GPM diesel pump with an ungodly length of hose to account for nearly any situation. Throughout sandy we saw no changes in water level or temperature in the spent fuel pool.

How long will until that pump runs out of diesel from onsite?

The SFP on the top of the reactor is not safe. I do not see how you can brush that off. Also security measures have failed many times because of industry corruption, along with screening employees and accidents unforeseen.

Cool post though, I have no doubt you guys work your asses off to make sure the plant runs safe as you can regardless of my opinion about them as a whole. Doubly so in such a storm. Thanks, I have a lot of friends in the area.

 

[SparkyJJO]

Actually, I could go on all night about the workings of a plant. Trust me, I have plenty of coffee on hand. So go ahead, "educate me".

Unlike some people here I don't pretend to know stuff that I don't. I'm not a nuclear scientist. Even if I was, I also would see little reason to "educate" those who do not wish to be.

Your problem is simple. You are seeing me as a nuclear-hugging, solar and wind bashing person. I'm not. Solar and wind have their purposes but they do not have the energy density of nuclear. In some places, that doesn't matter. Other places (i.e. Japan) it sure as heck does. Plus, the sun doesn't always shine, nor does the wind always blow, so you can't rely on those 100% anyway. Some places obviously are pretty good for solar or wind, but others not so much. I laugh when I see people wanting to put up solar panels around the Cleveland area for example

Oh, and your horse and buggy comparison is ridiculous and meaningless.

 

[Steeplerot]

Your problem is simple. You are seeing me as a nuclear-hugging, solar and wind bashing person. I'm not.

Well, you made a pretty bombastic statement in saying it could not compare, Nuke power is less then 30% of the USA's power. We lose far more then that in our old centralized transmission lines alone.

 

[SparkyJJO]

Read what I wrote again. I was comparing energy density. Did I make an extreme example? Yes. But the point was the energy density. It takes a lot more real estate of solar or wind to equal the power output of a typical nuclear plant. Doesn't matter if it is all in one spot or spread out. Do you really want to argue that point?

I'm also aware that nuclear is not the major portion of our electrical grid. At the same time, I think losing that 30% out of fear is rather ridiculous.

 

[Steeplerot]

Good job not reading your own source before posting it moron.

edit: haha - I see you did read it and you edited out the part I just quoted. Nice try there buddy.

Honestly, I did because I did not want to go there about the hibakusha stuff.

This forum is notoriously childish about race/discrimination issues. (to put it mildly)

Shits bad enough there without dragging discrimination into it. But it needs to be addressed. IMO this is one reason why evacuation (of children at the very freaking least) are not going on in a more responsible sized area.

It's literally holding millions as human guinea pigs. The youngest the most at risk.

 

[SparkyJJO]

Honestly, I did because I did not want to go there about the hibakusha stuff.

Shits bad enough there without dragging discrimination into it. But it needs to be addressed. IMO this is one reason why evacuation (of children at the very freaking least) are not going on in a more responsible sized area.

It's literally holding millions as human guinea pigs. The youngest the most at risk.

No one is forcing anyone to live near any nuclear plant. We have plenty of space in this country far, far away from nuclear power plants.

 

[Steeplerot]

No one is forcing anyone to live near any nuclear plant. We have plenty of space in this country far, far away from nuclear power plants.

That is a terrible argument. So what of young people?

 

[Acanthus]

Well, you made a pretty bombastic statement in saying it could not compare, Nuke power is less then 30% of the USA's power. We lose far more then that in our old centralized transmission lines alone.

Do you understand the volume of change you are proposing? Do you also understand that you need a strong "baseline" of power in order to keep continuous power operation?

838TWH of power was created by the Nuclear industry in 2008.

To replace this amount of energy, you would need to build ~200 new fossil fuel power plants, and that is only to meet current demands. Actual demand is ever-increasing.

 

[Steeplerot]

838TWH of power was created by the Nuclear industry in 2008.

Yes, less then 30%. Our distribution infrastructure is old, our plants are old, our main gameplan is early 20th century. Your ideas? 20th century also, straight from the mouths of those wishing to keep up the taxpayer subsidy gravy train.

 

[Acanthus]

Yes, less then 30%. Our distribution infrastructure is old, our plants are old, our main gameplan is early 20th century. Your ideas? 20th century also, straight from the mouths of those wishing to keep up the taxpayer subsidy gravy train.

What do you propose replacing our baseline power stations with?

 

[Steeplerot]

What do you propose replacing our baseline power stations with?

Renewable, like the rest of the civilized world is moving to. Amazing huh?

If you would like the full details and layout of the new decentralized energy grid and distribution sorry comrade. This is classified due to the sensitive nature of "i am not the freaking Energy Department nor is it relevant to the realities of the nuclear situation being discussed"

And...now we have the main distraction when nukies run out of ideas.

If Obama would like to hand me the reigns of the US's energy policy and resources available, sure lets do this. I dont see it happening though for some odd reason.

But to be on the safe side to make you feel better, if for some reason Big O is reading this shoot me a PM. We will hook this shit up.

Besides, Obama owes us commies a favor after that whole cloning him with Kenyan Socialist Pharoh DNA/implanting him into the USA thing.

Sucks cuz he stopped paying his "one big world union" dues. No respect.

 

[SparkyJJO]

lol

We've already had bankrupt solar companies disappear with taxpayer dollars. And you call nuclear a taxpayer subsidized gravy train? At least we get electricity out of it.

What renewable stuff are you referring to using as the baseline power station? No, solar and wind won't cut it. Not at their current output. And where would you propose getting all this money to do this stuff? Oh, the taxpayers, again. And in the end we'd be paying even more in electricity rates than we are now.

We may have an old power grid but at least the majority of the USA doesn't pay an arm and a leg for electricity quite yet. Last I checked Europe's energy costs are far greater than ours. I'm thankful that we don't have those costs, yet some people are hell bent on making us more like Europe like it is some grand thing... NO THANK YOU.

One thing I think is horribly underutilized is hydroelectric. Only a fraction of the hydro-capable dams in the USA are actually fitted with generators. The sun doesn't always shine, and the wind doesn't always blow, but the rivers always flow.