"Jim Elbrecht" wrote in message
...


Which they are reporting this morning was caused by *human error*. The
knucklehead in charge of keeping the generator running got distracted
and it ran out of deisel. Generator stops. . . pumps stop. . .

My car tells me when it's running low on gas, but a nuclear power plant
doesn't alert the crew when the backup generators are low on fuel, and you
you dont figure that's a design problem?

BTW, who is the "they" reporting this? Most of the world seems to think the
tsunami knocked out the backup generators.

http://blogs.forbes.com/bruceupbin/2...med-fukushima/
http://www.livescience.com/13294-tim...-reactors.html
http://allthingsnuclear.org/post/378...s-at-fukushima
http://www.newscientist.com/article/...ear-power.html

"DGDevin" wrote in message
"Jim Elbrecht" wrote in message

Which they are reporting this morning was caused by *human error*. The
knucklehead in charge of keeping the generator running got distracted
and it ran out of deisel. Generator stops. . . pumps stop. . .

My car tells me when it's running low on gas, but a nuclear power plant
doesn't alert the crew when the backup generators are low on fuel, and you
you don't figure that's a design problem?

That's exactly what I was thinking. ANY process that could lead to disaster
(like low fuel) better damn well have some sort of "Empty" indicator
screaming like a banshee when a meltdown is imminent. From what I've read,
they have no cameras, only readings from gauges, to tell them what it going
on. That's not giving me a warm, fuzzy feeling.

--
Bobby G.