On 19/02/2021 17:39, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 17:32:30 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 19/02/2021 17:16, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 17:05:02 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 19/02/2021 16:49, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 16:09:11 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

The two disasters, namely Chernobyl and Fukushima were two disasters
waiting to happen. The lessons are don't operate a reactor with
known design flaws and don't build a reactor by the ocean with a
history of tsunamis.

WEll that rather ****s Japan then ....

Rolls Royce SMR design is designed to be build on a concrete raft that
can be isolated from ground movement via any one of many different
earthquake proof methods.

It is of course a moot point as to whether you need to design a
reactor to survive a tsunami that kills all its customers...

And AIR the Fukushima reactor actually withstood a far bigger tsunami
and earthquake than even designed for ????


yep twice the size.

No design fault at all. Simply an event that had never been foreseen

I'd hope it *had* been foreseen, but discounted ... you have to draw the
line somewhere.

semantics. I do not foresee massed unicorns leaping off tower bridge. I
did foresee them in a delirium but have discounted them... What's the
difference?


--
Climate Change: Socialism wearing a lab coat.