http://www.energylivenews.com/2017/1...JHY5,1736S, 1

No experience of Korean nuclear engineering myself, but I was talking to
a senior manager from Horizon the other day, and he said that of all the
overseas suppliers had had been dealing with, he had been most impressed
by the Koreans.

newshound wrote in
o.uk:

http://www.energylivenews.com/2017/1...m-announced-as
-preferred-bidder-at-moorside/?utm_campaign=539590_DV_Power_Dec17&utm_m
edium=email&utm_source=imeche&dm_i=3X32,BKCM,32JHY 5,1736S,1

No experience of Korean nuclear engineering myself, but I was talking
to a senior manager from Horizon the other day, and he said that of
all the overseas suppliers had had been dealing with, he had been most
impressed by the Koreans.


I prefer this approach. Factory built - standardised...............
https://www.rolls-royce.com/products...small-modular-
reactors.aspx

On 13/12/2017 18:40, DerbyBorn wrote:
newshound wrote in
o.uk:

http://www.energylivenews.com/2017/1...m-announced-as
-preferred-bidder-at-moorside/?utm_campaign=539590_DV_Power_Dec17&utm_m
edium=email&utm_source=imeche&dm_i=3X32,BKCM,32JHY 5,1736S,1

No experience of Korean nuclear engineering myself, but I was talking
to a senior manager from Horizon the other day, and he said that of
all the overseas suppliers had had been dealing with, he had been most
impressed by the Koreans.


I prefer this approach. Factory built - standardised...............
https://www.rolls-royce.com/products...small-modular-
reactors.aspx

There's a lot to be said for it. But you really need to get
international agreement on licensing. Imagine if every country had a
different approach to regulating aircraft.

It will be interesting to see if the government funding for SMRs
actually leads to anything. One of the problems is that SMRs could be
really good for smaller and developing countries, but it's only a few
large industrialised countries which are building nuclear plants, and
then the economies of scale of larger plant kick in. South Africa
started making a good case for the PBMR nearly 20 years ago, but it got
nowhere.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble...odular_reactor

On 13/12/2017 18:20, newshound wrote:
http://www.energylivenews.com/2017/1...JHY5,1736S, 1


No experience of Korean nuclear engineering myself, but I was talking to
a senior manager from Horizon the other day, and he said that of all the
overseas suppliers had had been dealing with, he had been most impressed
by the Koreans.

Doesn't The North seem to have more experience in the field than The South?

In article 2,
DerbyBorn writes
newshound wrote in
news:mt6dndL504Ab8qzHnZ2dnUU78X3NnZ2d@brightview. co.uk:

http://www.energylivenews.com/2017/1...m-announced-as
-preferred-bidder-at-moorside/?utm_campaign=539590_DV_Power_Dec17&utm_m
edium=email&utm_source=imeche&dm_i=3X32,BKCM,32JHY 5,1736S,1

No experience of Korean nuclear engineering myself, but I was talking
to a senior manager from Horizon the other day, and he said that of
all the overseas suppliers had had been dealing with, he had been most
impressed by the Koreans.


I prefer this approach. Factory built - standardised...............
https://www.rolls-royce.com/products...small-modular-
reactors.aspx
I don't really care which approach they take just as long as they get on
with it and build some nukes without yet another "review".
--
bert

On 13/12/17 19:33, newshound wrote:
Imagine if every country had a different approach to regulating aircraft.

I think they do

I am sure there are some planes that cannot land in certain countries.


--
€œIt is hard to imagine a more stupid decision or more dangerous way of
making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people
who pay no price for being wrong.€�

Thomas Sowell

On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 19:51:15 +0000, Jim Chisholm wrote:

On 13/12/2017 18:20, newshound wrote:
http://www.energylivenews.com/2017/1...JHY5,1736S, 1

No experience of Korean nuclear engineering myself, but I was talking to
a senior manager from Horizon the other day, and he said that of all the
overseas suppliers had had been dealing with, he had been most impressed
by the Koreans.

Doesn't The North seem to have more experience in the field than The South?

It is working towards exporting nukes to other countries - via same-day
delivery.
--
Peter.
The gods will stay away
whilst religions hold sway

On an allied front, does anyone know about all this legal wrangling in Japan
about whether they will restart their nuclear reactors or not?I heard it on
a foreign station yesterday. It seems there is disagreement about the safety
of them after the problems encountered when they got the tsunami, even
though steps have been taken to protect the control systems now.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"newshound" wrote in message
o.uk...
http://www.energylivenews.com/2017/1...JHY5,1736S, 1

No experience of Korean nuclear engineering myself, but I was talking to a
senior manager from Horizon the other day, and he said that of all the
overseas suppliers had had been dealing with, he had been most impressed
by the Koreans.

On 14/12/2017 07:27, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 13/12/17 19:33, newshound wrote:
Imagine if every country had a different approach to regulating aircraft.

I think they do

I am sure there are some planes that cannot land in certain countries.

True, but there is at least a fair degree of harmony

On 14/12/2017 08:31, PeterC wrote:
On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 19:51:15 +0000, Jim Chisholm wrote:

On 13/12/2017 18:20, newshound wrote:
http://www.energylivenews.com/2017/1...JHY5,1736S, 1

No experience of Korean nuclear engineering myself, but I was talking to
a senior manager from Horizon the other day, and he said that of all the
overseas suppliers had had been dealing with, he had been most impressed
by the Koreans.

Doesn't The North seem to have more experience in the field than The South?

It is working towards exporting nukes to other countries - via same-day
delivery.

:-)

But how many North Korean products do you currently have in your home?

On 14/12/17 11:43, newshound wrote:
On 14/12/2017 08:31, PeterC wrote:
On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 19:51:15 +0000, Jim Chisholm wrote:

On 13/12/2017 18:20, newshound wrote:
http://www.energylivenews.com/2017/1...JHY5,1736S, 1


No experience of Korean nuclear engineering myself, but I was
talking to
a senior manager from Horizon the other day, and he said that of all
the
overseas suppliers had had been dealing with, he had been most
impressed
by the Koreans.

Doesn't The North seem to have more experience in the field than The
South?

It is working towards exporting nukes to other countries - via same-day
delivery.

:-)

But how many North Korean products do you currently have in your home?

The chilling thought is that NOBODY KNOWS



--
"Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They
always run out of other people's money. It's quite a characteristic of them"

Margaret Thatcher

On Thursday, 14 December 2017 08:31:17 UTC, PeterC wrote:
On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 19:51:15 +0000, Jim Chisholm wrote:

On 13/12/2017 18:20, newshound wrote:
http://www.energylivenews.com/2017/1...JHY5,1736S, 1

No experience of Korean nuclear engineering myself, but I was talking to
a senior manager from Horizon the other day, and he said that of all the
overseas suppliers had had been dealing with, he had been most impressed
by the Koreans.

Doesn't The North seem to have more experience in the field than The South?

It is working towards exporting nukes to other countries - via same-day
delivery.

Our students find this sort of thing confusing they ask me to order something from amazon that says next day despatch and can;t work out why the following morning it hasn't arrived from china and expect us to pay for amazon prime or an express delivery service.

On 14/12/2017 11:43, newshound wrote:
On 14/12/2017 08:31, PeterC wrote:
On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 19:51:15 +0000, Jim Chisholm wrote:

On 13/12/2017 18:20, newshound wrote:
http://www.energylivenews.com/2017/1...JHY5,1736S, 1


No experience of Korean nuclear engineering myself, but I was
talking to
a senior manager from Horizon the other day, and he said that of all
the
overseas suppliers had had been dealing with, he had been most
impressed
by the Koreans.

Doesn't The North seem to have more experience in the field than The
South?

It is working towards exporting nukes to other countries - via same-day
delivery.

:-)

But how many North Korean products do you currently have in your home?

How many tee shirts and the like do you have?
Its only in the last few weeks that China has agreed not to put made in
China labels in North Korean produce clothing.

On 14/12/17 11:56, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 19:33:59 +0000, newshound wrote:

On 13/12/2017 18:40, DerbyBorn wrote:
[quoted text muted]
There's a lot to be said for it. But you really need to get
international agreement on licensing. Imagine if every country had a
different approach to regulating aircraft.

Something the UK has decided to make much harder by leaving EURATOM.


Oh no.

Foirstofallwe probabl;y wont leave Euratom, but if we did nuxlear power
is EASIER. Less regulation, more safety.

We didn't really want nuclear power anyway. And radiotherapy is probably
overrated too.

Speak for yourself.


--
Labour - a bunch of rich people convincing poor people to vote for rich
people
by telling poor people that "other" rich people are the reason they are
poor.

Peter Thompson

In article , PeterC
writes
On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 19:51:15 +0000, Jim Chisholm wrote:

On 13/12/2017 18:20, newshound wrote:

http://www.energylivenews.com/2017/1...rm-announced-a
s-preferred-bidder-at-moorside/?utm_campaign=539590_DV_Power_Dec17&utm
_medium=email&utm_source=imeche&dm_i=3X32,BKCM, 32JHY5,1736S,1

No experience of Korean nuclear engineering myself, but I was talking to
a senior manager from Horizon the other day, and he said that of all the
overseas suppliers had had been dealing with, he had been most impressed
by the Koreans.

Doesn't The North seem to have more experience in the field than The South?

It is working towards exporting nukes to other countries - via same-day
delivery.
Using super-drones.
--
bert

Brian Gaff wrote

On an allied front, does anyone know about all this legal wrangling in
Japan about whether they will restart their nuclear reactors or not?

Just the usual mindless **** fight. Quite a few want them all shut down
forever and the current PM wants to tell them to go and **** themselves.

I heard it on a foreign station yesterday. It seems there is disagreement
about the safety of them after the problems encountered when they got the
tsunami, even though steps have been taken to protect the control systems
now.

The problem wasn’t the control systems, it was the standby generators
ending up under water etc. Trivially easy to fix so it doesn’t happen again.

"newshound" wrote in message
o.uk...
http://www.energylivenews.com/2017/1...JHY5,1736S, 1

No experience of Korean nuclear engineering myself, but I was talking to
a senior manager from Horizon the other day, and he said that of all the
overseas suppliers had had been dealing with, he had been most impressed
by the Koreans.

On 14/12/2017 20:11, Rod Speed wrote:
Brian Gaff wrote

On an allied front, does anyone know about all this legal wrangling in
Japan about whether they will restart their nuclear reactors or not?

Just the usual mindless **** fight. Quite a few want them all shut down
forever and the current PM wants to tell them to go and **** themselves.

I heard it on a foreign station yesterday. It seems there is
disagreement about the safety of them after the problems encountered
when they got the tsunami, even though steps have been taken to
protect the control systems now.

The problem wasn’t the control systems, it was the standby generators
ending up under water etc. Trivially easy to fix so it doesn’t happen
again.

It is actually a fundamental design flaw. If a new station was being
designed from scratch, they would not be relying upon protecting the
generators - they had done that anyway, but not anticipated such a high
tsunami and so the protections were insufficient. Modern practice would
be to design the reactor so that it would fail-safe without power to the
control systems. The target now is passive safety rather than active as
nothing can fail to operate, lose power or sieze from misuse if nothing
has to move or be controlled.

SteveW

"Steve Walker" wrote in message
news
On 14/12/2017 20:11, Rod Speed wrote:
Brian Gaff wrote

On an allied front, does anyone know about all this legal wrangling in
Japan about whether they will restart their nuclear reactors or not?

Just the usual mindless **** fight. Quite a few want them all shut down
forever and the current PM wants to tell them to go and **** themselves.

I heard it on a foreign station yesterday. It seems there is
disagreement about the safety of them after the problems encountered
when they got the tsunami, even though steps have been taken to protect
the control systems now.

The problem wasn’t the control systems, it was the standby generators
ending up under water etc. Trivially easy to fix so it doesn’t happen
again.

It is actually a fundamental design flaw. If a new station was being
designed from scratch, they would not be relying upon protecting the
generators - they had done that anyway, but not anticipated such a high
tsunami and so the protections were insufficient. Modern practice would be
to design the reactor so that it would fail-safe without power to the
control systems. The target now is passive safety rather than active as
nothing can fail to operate, lose power or sieze from misuse if nothing
has to move or be controlled.

Sure, but that’s all academic to the question of whether
they should leave them all turned off forever now.

On 14/12/17 23:59, Steve Walker wrote:
On 14/12/2017 20:11, Rod Speed wrote:
Brian Gaff wrote

On an allied front, does anyone know about all this legal wrangling
in Japan about whether they will restart their nuclear reactors or not?

Just the usual mindless **** fight. Quite a few want them all shut down
forever and the current PM wants to tell them to go and **** themselves.

I heard it on a foreign station yesterday. It seems there is
disagreement about the safety of them after the problems encountered
when they got the tsunami, even though steps have been taken to
protect the control systems now.

The problem wasnt the control systems, it was the standby generators
ending up under water etc. Trivially easy to fix so it doesnt happen
again.

It is actually a fundamental design flaw. If a new station was being
designed from scratch, they would not be relying upon protecting the
generators - they had done that anyway, but not anticipated such a high
tsunami and so the protections were insufficient. Modern practice would
be to design the reactor so that it would fail-safe without power to the
control systems. The target now is passive safety rather than active as
nothing can fail to operate, lose power or sieze from misuse if nothing
has to move or be controlled.

SteveW
It wasnt power to the control systems thatwas the problem. It was power
to the circulation pumps

The reactors were scrammed: nothing left to control. Just a simple
matter or removing decay heat.


--
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in
someone else's pocket.

On 15/12/17 08:25, Chris Hogg wrote:
On Fri, 15 Dec 2017 06:31:55 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 14/12/17 23:59, Steve Walker wrote:

It is actually a fundamental design flaw. If a new station was being
designed from scratch, they would not be relying upon protecting the
generators - they had done that anyway, but not anticipated such a high
tsunami and so the protections were insufficient. Modern practice would
be to design the reactor so that it would fail-safe without power to the
control systems. The target now is passive safety rather than active as
nothing can fail to operate, lose power or sieze from misuse if nothing
has to move or be controlled.

SteveW
It wasnt power to the control systems thatwas the problem. It was power
to the circulation pumps

The reactors were scrammed: nothing left to control. Just a simple
matter or removing decay heat.

+1. AIUI current designs rely on a gravity feed for such cooling
water, i.e. a water tank on stilts.

Ok as long as you dont turn the reactor upside down :-)


--
The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all
private property.

Karl Marx

On 15/12/2017 08:25, Chris Hogg wrote:
On Fri, 15 Dec 2017 06:31:55 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 14/12/17 23:59, Steve Walker wrote:

It is actually a fundamental design flaw. If a new station was being
designed from scratch, they would not be relying upon protecting the
generators - they had done that anyway, but not anticipated such a high
tsunami and so the protections were insufficient. Modern practice would
be to design the reactor so that it would fail-safe without power to the
control systems. The target now is passive safety rather than active as
nothing can fail to operate, lose power or sieze from misuse if nothing
has to move or be controlled.

SteveW
It wasnt power to the control systems thatwas the problem. It was power
to the circulation pumps

The reactors were scrammed: nothing left to control. Just a simple
matter or removing decay heat.

+1. AIUI current designs rely on a gravity feed for such cooling
water, i.e. a water tank on stilts.

Yes. That was my point about passive safety - zero power is required and
zero control.

SteveW

On 14/12/2017 13:19, dennis@home wrote:
On 14/12/2017 11:43, newshound wrote:
On 14/12/2017 08:31, PeterC wrote:
On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 19:51:15 +0000, Jim Chisholm wrote:

On 13/12/2017 18:20, newshound wrote:
http://www.energylivenews.com/2017/1...JHY5,1736S, 1


No experience of Korean nuclear engineering myself, but I was
talking to
a senior manager from Horizon the other day, and he said that of
all the
overseas suppliers had had been dealing with, he had been most
impressed
by the Koreans.

Doesn't The North seem to have more experience in the field than The
South?

It is working towards exporting nukes to other countries - via same-day
delivery.

:-)

But how many North Korean products do you currently have in your home?

How many tee shirts and the like do you have?
Its only in the last few weeks that China has agreed not to put made in
China labels in North Korean produce clothing.



OK clothing maybe, but I don't for a minute believe they are producing
any significant tech for the world market.

In Soviet days, the USSR was proud of getting quite decent optics into
the west as a way of getting foreign exchange. And the odd radio and TV.
In fact my own first TV, in the early 70's, was a six inch B&W which ran
on mains or 12 volts.

In article ,
newshound writes
On 14/12/2017 13:19, dennis@home wrote:
On 14/12/2017 11:43, newshound wrote:
On 14/12/2017 08:31, PeterC wrote:
On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 19:51:15 +0000, Jim Chisholm wrote:

On 13/12/2017 18:20, newshound wrote:

http://www.energylivenews.com/2017/1...-firm-announce
d-as-preferred-bidder-at-moorside/?utm_campaign=539590_DV_Power_Dec
17&utm_medium=email&utm_source=imeche&dm_i=3 X32,BKCM,32JHY5,1736S,1

No experience of Korean nuclear engineering myself, but I was
talking to
a senior manager from Horizon the other day, and he said that of
all the
overseas suppliers had had been dealing with, he had been most
impressed
by the Koreans.

Doesn't The North seem to have more experience in the field than
The South?

It is working towards exporting nukes to other countries - via same-day
delivery.

:-)

But how many North Korean products do you currently have in your home?
How many tee shirts and the like do you have?
Its only in the last few weeks that China has agreed not to put made
in China labels in North Korean produce clothing.

OK clothing maybe, but I don't for a minute believe they are producing
any significant tech for the world market.

In Soviet days, the USSR was proud of getting quite decent optics into
the west as a way of getting foreign exchange. And the odd radio and
TV. In fact my own first TV, in the early 70's, was a six inch B&W
which ran on mains or 12 volts.
I had an early Sekonda watch in the 60s - pretty crap.
They also wanted to pay for computers with Xmas cards!!.
--
bert

On Fri, 15 Dec 2017 19:49:42 +0000, newshound
wrote:

On 14/12/2017 13:19, dennis@home wrote:
On 14/12/2017 11:43, newshound wrote:
On 14/12/2017 08:31, PeterC wrote:
On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 19:51:15 +0000, Jim Chisholm wrote:

On 13/12/2017 18:20, newshound wrote:
http://www.energylivenews.com/2017/1...JHY5,1736S, 1


No experience of Korean nuclear engineering myself, but I was
talking to
a senior manager from Horizon the other day, and he said that of
all the
overseas suppliers had had been dealing with, he had been most
impressed
by the Koreans.

Doesn't The North seem to have more experience in the field than The
South?

It is working towards exporting nukes to other countries - via same-day
delivery.

:-)

But how many North Korean products do you currently have in your home?

How many tee shirts and the like do you have?
Its only in the last few weeks that China has agreed not to put made in
China labels in North Korean produce clothing.



OK clothing maybe, but I don't for a minute believe they are producing
any significant tech for the world market.

In Soviet days, the USSR was proud of getting quite decent optics into
the west as a way of getting foreign exchange. And the odd radio and TV.
In fact my own first TV, in the early 70's, was a six inch B&W which ran
on mains or 12 volts.

I have a faint memory of buying an early pocket sized transistor radio
which was affordable and Russian made and a Zenit camera at around the
same time. Bit worrying now come to think of it, it was from a guy
who worked at RR but I don't think he was Russian.

--
AnthonyL

On 15/12/17 06:31, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
It wasnt power to the control systems thatwas the problem. It was power
to the circulation pumps

The reactors were scrammed: nothing left to control. Just a simple
matter or removing decay heat.


Would it have been safer to leave the reactors running?

Another Dave

--
Change nospam to techie

On 17/12/17 14:22, Another Dave wrote:
On 15/12/17 06:31, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
It wasnt power to the control systems thatwas the problem. It was
power to the circulation pumps

The reactors were scrammed: nothing left to control. Just a simple
matter or removing decay heat.


Would it have been safer to leave the reactors running?

certainly not without cooling...

Another Dave



--
"Women actually are capable of being far more than the feminists will
let them."

On 17/12/17 14:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 17/12/17 14:22, Another Dave wrote:
On 15/12/17 06:31, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
It wasnt power to the control systems thatwas the problem. It was
power to the circulation pumps

The reactors were scrammed: nothing left to control. Just a simple
matter or removing decay heat.


Would it have been safer to leave the reactors running?

certainly not without cooling...


But wouldn't the cooling system be powered by the running power station?

As it was there was no power from the grid or the diesel backup.


--
Change nospam to techie

On Sun, 17 Dec 2017 18:00:24 +0000, Another Dave wrote:

On 17/12/17 14:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 17/12/17 14:22, Another Dave wrote:
On 15/12/17 06:31, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
It wasnt power to the control systems thatwas the problem. It was
power to the circulation pumps

The reactors were scrammed: nothing left to control. Just a simple
matter or removing decay heat.


Would it have been safer to leave the reactors running?

certainly not without cooling...


But wouldn't the cooling system be powered by the running power station?

As it was there was no power from the grid or the diesel backup.

OK until the control systems get flooded...



--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On 17/12/2017 12:48, AnthonyL wrote:
On Fri, 15 Dec 2017 19:49:42 +0000, newshound
wrote:

On 14/12/2017 13:19, dennis@home wrote:
On 14/12/2017 11:43, newshound wrote:
On 14/12/2017 08:31, PeterC wrote:
On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 19:51:15 +0000, Jim Chisholm wrote:

On 13/12/2017 18:20, newshound wrote:
http://www.energylivenews.com/2017/1...JHY5,1736S, 1


No experience of Korean nuclear engineering myself, but I was
talking to
a senior manager from Horizon the other day, and he said that of
all the
overseas suppliers had had been dealing with, he had been most
impressed
by the Koreans.

Doesn't The North seem to have more experience in the field than The
South?

It is working towards exporting nukes to other countries - via same-day
delivery.

:-)

But how many North Korean products do you currently have in your home?

How many tee shirts and the like do you have?
Its only in the last few weeks that China has agreed not to put made in
China labels in North Korean produce clothing.



OK clothing maybe, but I don't for a minute believe they are producing
any significant tech for the world market.

In Soviet days, the USSR was proud of getting quite decent optics into
the west as a way of getting foreign exchange. And the odd radio and TV.
In fact my own first TV, in the early 70's, was a six inch B&W which ran
on mains or 12 volts.

I have a faint memory of buying an early pocket sized transistor radio
which was affordable and Russian made and a Zenit camera at around the
same time. Bit worrying now come to think of it, it was from a guy
who worked at RR but I don't think he was Russian.

The Zenit was OK, but the lenses on the Zorki 4 were superb, especially
the 50 mm F2.

On 17/12/2017 18:34, Bob Eager wrote:
On Sun, 17 Dec 2017 18:00:24 +0000, Another Dave wrote:

On 17/12/17 14:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 17/12/17 14:22, Another Dave wrote:
On 15/12/17 06:31, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
It wasnt power to the control systems thatwas the problem. It was
power to the circulation pumps

The reactors were scrammed: nothing left to control. Just a simple
matter or removing decay heat.


Would it have been safer to leave the reactors running?

certainly not without cooling...


But wouldn't the cooling system be powered by the running power station?

As it was there was no power from the grid or the diesel backup.

OK until the control systems get flooded...



Not sure about the rules in Japan, but in the UK when you lose the grid
connection you are expected to trip the reactors. At this point you are
very dependent on the standby generators for "current generation" plant.
This is where the passive cooling of the EPR and other "next generation"
plant shows its advantage.

I guess the earthquake might have taken out the grid. (Some of the 40 yo
Fukushima plant had only a month or two to run before closure).

I don't think the tsunami got particularly close to the main reactor
buildings or central control room.

"Bob Eager" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 17 Dec 2017 18:00:24 +0000, Another Dave wrote:

On 17/12/17 14:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 17/12/17 14:22, Another Dave wrote:
On 15/12/17 06:31, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
It wasnt power to the control systems thatwas the problem. It was
power to the circulation pumps

The reactors were scrammed: nothing left to control. Just a simple
matter or removing decay heat.


Would it have been safer to leave the reactors running?

certainly not without cooling...


But wouldn't the cooling system be powered by the running power station?

As it was there was no power from the grid or the diesel backup.

OK until the control systems get flooded...

They never were.

On 17/12/17 18:00, Another Dave wrote:
On 17/12/17 14:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 17/12/17 14:22, Another Dave wrote:
On 15/12/17 06:31, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
It wasnt power to the control systems thatwas the problem. It was
power to the circulation pumps

The reactors were scrammed: nothing left to control. Just a simple
matter or removing decay heat.


Would it have been safer to leave the reactors running?

certainly not without cooling...


But wouldn't the cooling system be powered by the running power station?

As it was there was no power from the grid or the diesel backup.


Ah. I see your point. The reactor couldhave run its own coolant pumps.
Sadly the weherwithal to absorb 5GW of power even with cooling, without
a grid connection is probably too much to hope for.



--
Climate Change: Socialism wearing a lab coat.

On 17/12/17 20:18, newshound wrote:
On 17/12/2017 12:48, AnthonyL wrote:
On Fri, 15 Dec 2017 19:49:42 +0000, newshound
wrote:

On 14/12/2017 13:19, dennis@home wrote:
On 14/12/2017 11:43, newshound wrote:
On 14/12/2017 08:31, PeterC wrote:
On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 19:51:15 +0000, Jim Chisholm wrote:

On 13/12/2017 18:20, newshound wrote:
http://www.energylivenews.com/2017/1...JHY5,1736S, 1



No experience of Korean nuclear engineering myself, but I was
talking to
a senior manager from Horizon the other day, and he said that of
all the
overseas suppliers had had been dealing with, he had been most
impressed
by the Koreans.

Doesn't The North seem to have more experience in the field than The
South?

It is working towards exporting nukes to other countries - via
same-day
delivery.

:-)

But how many North Korean products do you currently have in your home?

How many tee shirts and the like do you have?
Its only in the last few weeks that China has agreed not to put made in
China labels in North Korean produce clothing.



OK clothing maybe, but I don't for a minute believe they are producing
any significant tech for the world market.

In Soviet days, the USSR was proud of getting quite decent optics into
the west as a way of getting foreign exchange. And the odd radio and TV.
In fact my own first TV, in the early 70's, was a six inch B&W which ran
on mains or 12 volts.

I have a faint memory of buying an early pocket sized transistor radio
which was affordable and Russian made and a Zenit camera at around the
same time.Â* Bit worrying now come to think of it, it was from a guy
who worked at RR but I don't think he was Russian.

The Zenit was OK, but the lenses on the Zorki 4 were superb, especially
the 50 mm F2.

Back in the day (1980s)I bought second hand an £850 zoom by Angenieux
for a manual nikon.

It was pretty much the best zoom available at that time.

Today a plasticky piece of auto****-us Nikon **** with VR outperforms it
at todays price of less than £200....



--
Climate Change: Socialism wearing a lab coat.