430 power plants world wide, a total of 33 incidents since 1952.
http://www.theguardian.com/news/data...ents-list-rank
READ and be less Ignorant.
All they had to do is look at the Onagawa Plant and say "This. You guys need to do this."
Actually, both Chernobyl and Fukushima were American designs - the issue is that Chernobyl wasn't built correctly, and Fukushima was way past when it was supposed to be decommisioned. When things are supposed to be decommisioned, Not decommisioning them shouldn't be a choice available to politicians: especcially regarding nuclear power.
Modern reactors are to Tesla's, what Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, and Fukushima are to Model T's. Nuclear reactor design theory has changed so much in the last 50-70 years, thorium was always the better fuel choice for power, cost and waste considerations. We have been doing nuclear power all wrong.
That depends on how you look at it.
The Plutonium from previous generation reactors was considered desirable given the fact that we were in an arms race against Russia.
And while I cannot say for certain... I'm like 99.999% sure the Soviets would never "stoop" to using American engineering.
Last edited by Laize; 2013-11-22 at 07:30 PM.
Warning : Above post may contain snark and/or sarcasm. Try reparsing with the /s argument before replying.
What the world has learned is that America is never more than one election away from losing its goddamned mindMe on Elite : Dangerous | My WoW charactersOriginally Posted by Howard Tayler
Um, are you sure about this? I remember hearing about some scandal where the company responsible for Fukushima hadn't kept the reactor up to code.
- - - Updated - - -
Both things should be taken into consideration. The more scary the consequences the lower of probability you need to justify the choice. You also need to take into account what is gained on success.
The waste from nuclear power is water soluble. If you think about it you mine the stuff from the ground why not just put the stuff back in the ground after you use it. It's because it dilutes in water... in the water table... solution in drinking water taken up by plants and animals and people.
If they made nuclear waste or the products bound to something that was not water soluble it would be as safe as it is in the ground. That is if people follow the rules. Still some radiation leaks. Could be as bad as being an x-ray tech could be worse or better. They have the technology to contain that radiation it's a matter of it being worth it to spend the money to make it that way.
-Nish
I don't know everything about baseball. Most people don't know 'everything' about baseball. People fall into two two categories. Person A will, when they see I don't know something, try to explain it to me in detail so I understand it. Person B will use their knowledge to make me out to be stupid. Person B is no friend of mine.
Not quite, it was a cover up from the start. The containment vessel was flawed from the get go, they knew it, didn't have the money build a new one so they swept it under the rug.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-0...t-reactor.html
Tanaka says the reactor pressure vessel inside Fukushima’s unit No. 4 was damaged at a Babcock-Hitachi foundry in Kure City, in Hiroshima prefecture, during the last step of a manufacturing process that took 2 1/2 years and cost tens of millions of dollars. If the mistake had been discovered, the company might have been bankrupted, he said.