DIYbanter - View Single Post

Jeff Thies

On 4/3/2011 9:14 AM, wrote:
On Apr 2, 4:26 pm, Jeff wrote:
On 3/30/2011 7:49 AM, HeyBub wrote:

Higgs Boson wrote:
On Mar 29, 9:46 am, bob wrote:
Once GE gewts hit with all the lawsuits over the japanese reactor
there will be no profits to pay taxes on, GE will end up in
bankruptcy.

Their cheaper reactor the buyers got what they paid for

I gotta say that, according to what's coming out now, the Japanese
engineers/geologists/other specialists were using very, very, very old
data when planning and siting these reactors. Nobody had properly
studied the history of earthquakes going back over 1,000 years.

It was known. There was data that tsunamis had swept as far as 2 miles
inland near that location. That data was discarded as being too old to
be "reliable".

This was revisited not too long ago and the Tsunami risk wasn't even
looked into.

This

is just plain inexcusable. Not that GE isn't at fault too for their
criminal greed, but the Japanese had a duty to study the geology and
earthquake history of these areas before committing to the cheap-o GE
product.

What greed? What cheap-o product? The reactors performed exactly - or almost
exactly - as they were designed. They shut themselves down properly and so
forth.

Actually they didn't shut down properly. Unit One ran into trouble early
on and it was designed with a passive cooling loop to the condensor. It
should have been fine for some time with no power. The rest of them also
had troubles shutting down. The only thing that did function properly
was the control rods.

Here we go again. The information coming out of Japan has been
sketchy
at best and frequently wrong. Yet our resident armchair nulcear
expert knows
exactly what happened. Obviously totally ignorant and biased.

And you aren't?

Any
reasonable person knows that only after a full investigation by
experts
will we know what happened, what the sequence of events were, and
what went wrong.

I never said there wouldn't be, or shouldn't be.

And you have yet to disprove anything I've said. Or even attempt to do
anything but shoot the messenger.

Why is your reasoning limited to that?

I've found a few tidbits here and there I haven't posted because of a
lack of interest. Did you know that the spent fuel pools have a side
door(s) sealed with an inflatable seal? Or that the control rods which
come from under the reactor are sealed with graphite plugs?

There, more information than you are comfortable dealing with.

I have a great deal of respect for Thomas Edison's company, always
have. They completely changed the design in the Mark 2.

Now, pop away with your insults. It does make you feel better.

Jeff