On 4/4/2011 10:13 PM, Robert Green wrote:
"Jeff wrote in message
...
stuff snipped
Yes. Hell, I'd happily take a ride
on that Wright Flyer, if offered.

A very dangerous proposition, in it's day all the early flyers were
hazardous and had more that their share of deaths. Orville escaped when
his passenger was killed and that was the improved model.

Not only that, but the materials are a century old. Bad things happen to
stress-bearing materials if they aren't stored just right. The Flyer was
made of "big spruce" and over time, original parts were loaned and never
returned. It was restored in 1985, which is expected to last 75 years, but
that's restoration to museum quality and not necessarily flight readiness.
Maybe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wright_Flyer

A nuclear reactor is not a plane.

No, but they have a remarkable similarity. They are man-made objects that
have caused some of the most spectacular disasters in human history. Both
are the object of intense scrutiny by the public when there is a disaster.
You can no more stop that process than you can stop Charlie Sheen's Ego,
interest in Michael Jackson's death or Lindsay Lohan's probation. (-:

:-)

The question seems to be "is it legitimate to "armchair analyze" either type
of disaster?

The answer is of course "yes." It's never a bad thing to analyze what it
known AND unknown about a disaster serious enough to kill hundreds or
thousands of people in a single incident. People learn by discussing things
and trying to determine what needs to change to insure a better, safer
world.

I, of course, agree. I'm rather appalled that anyone would try to
obstruct that.

snip


There is one segment of society that generally does *not* benefit from
monday morning quarterbacking, and that's people who own stock in a company
like GE, whose liability may or may not affect its bottom line. Whenever
there's a general "talking smack" about a company on the net or in the
papers, that company's stock drops. For the faithful, it's just an
opportunity to buy more shares, cheap. For the worried, it could be a
significant loss of wealth as they fear a much further drop if they don't
sell. When they sell, the price drops even more and a run can start.

A nuclear reactor should not have to rely on a single backup diesel
generator to keep from being turned into a smoking pile of rubble. That
is a design flaw. A nuclear reactor should not have it's spent fuel pool
in such a location as to be easily damaged and exposed, covered by
little more than a sheet metal roof. Too clever by half.

There were apparently quite serious problems at multiple levels in Japan.
Watching them trying to fix a high pressure radioactive leak from the
outside makes me want to scream "haven't you guys ever fixed a leaky tank,
tire or basement?" Gotta do it from the *inside* if you want it to hold.

As it turns out the "diaper" mix never got in the water flow.

Someone should have thought about what happens when a containment vessel
cracks and what sort of boat and paddle would get you out of ****z Creek.
What happens if a jetliner full of fuel hits one of these things? Will it
burn like the WTC, heating the vessel until it fails?

I don't know what simulations have been done, but this is a concrete
structure with a "tin" roof. Anything that would cause the fuel rods to
be uncovered would result in a fire in the zirconium coating, followed
by massive spewing of radioactive smoke. That is why they were so
desperate to pump water in. Since reactor 4 was in cold shut down, it
would appear that the damage to it's spent fuel pool was caused by the
*adjacent* building blowing it's top off. A dedicated terrorist could do
a lot worse.


The accident in Japan certainly soured me on nuke power. It's clear that
they don't have the waste issue under control - open pools, tin roofs? WTF?

They were obviously designed in a different world. The Mark 1 was
designed more for convenience (and lower expense) than anything else.
Too clever by half.

It's clear they are not equal to the greatest blow the Earth can hand out.
The containment vessel crack was in all probability a result of the quake.

Possibly, the early containments aren't rated for the g forces that
transpired. It would seem more likely any problems would be at one of
the many holes in the structure that plumbing runs through. There is a
lot of plumbing damage from the quake. Another issue is that these were
designed to come apart. This probably is not a crack per say in the
pressure vessel. Doubtless there are cracks galore elsewhere.


So even without the tsunami, there has been serious trouble. That means
redesign. Prolonged discussion needs to precede redesign so that all the
potential problems are addressed. It's becoming clear that *lack* of
thorough discussion contributed to designers overlooking the potential
tsunami damage

It's fairly clear that the Mark 1 does not recover gracefully. The
nearby Fukushima II also suffered from a tsunami wave more than twice
the height of it's sea wall which knocked out it's pump rooms. That
recovered.

These reactors have to be able to absorb worst case scenarios because
the worst case is vast areas of earth scorched for a very long time.
There is much in the news of the lingering fallout from Chernoble. Not
only is a large around Chernoble uninhabitable, but wild boar in Germany
are often too radioactive to eat. Even as far as Scotland the sheep
"farmers" are just now all getting the clearance to sell.


l I can say is "sorry for your loss" to the people who own GE stock or who
work(ed) for them. The bottom line is "everybody gets their turn in the
barrel." Today, it's GE.

GE is pretty much off the hook for damages. This will likely kill
reactor sales, but gas turbine sales will increase. And you know who
makes those! If I still held GE I wouldn't sell, but I've thought that
before and been wrong!

Otherwise, like the losses in our own financial sector, it is the
public that bears the much of the costs, not the corporate holders.
There is something fundamentally wrong where large profits are made and
when the risk catches up, their losses are absorbed by the public.

Jeff

--
Bobby G.