Subject

It appears that one of the back up safety controls is to use back up
diesel engine/generator sets to provide control power during emergency
reactor shut downs.

In Japan, these engine/generator sets have been wiped out by the
tsunamis.

So much for that back up.

Here in SoCal, we have the San Onofre nuclear generating station right
on the shore line about half way between Los Angeles and San Diego.

This is residential country with some high priced SoCal real-estate
less than 2 miles away.

It also has a diesel engine/generator sets to provide control power
during emergency reactor shut down.

Earlier this week the plant mgr was interviewed one of the local TV
stations.

Plant mgr was very proud of the San Onofre design improvements in
recent years including the construction of a 30 ft high wall and
underground diesel storage tanks.

A couple of thoughts:

1) Are the diesels automatically started by a clutch and spinning
flywheel approach used by the Las Vegas casinos 50+ years ago, or are
they depending on a standard cranking motor and battery?

Cranking motor and battery is less costly.

2) I personally question whether a 30 ft retaining wall is enough,
probably needs at least another 5-7 ft.

3) How do you build a safe diesel fuel storage vessel underground in
earthquake country?

As we are finding out, there is a lot of uncharted nuclear energy
territory out there.

Lew

"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
b.com...


Earlier this week the plant mgr was interviewed one of the local TV
stations.

Plant mgr was very proud of the San Onofre design improvements in recent
years including the construction of a 30 ft high wall and underground
diesel storage tanks.

Tonight on the BBC there was video of what is left of the *massive* walls
meant to protect a particular Japanese town from tsunami damage. These
enormous steel-reinforced concrete structures, as thick as they are high
(think yards, not feet), were broken up into gigantic chunks that completely
failed to protect the town which for all purposes no longer exists. A 30 ft
wall? Talk about false security.

"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
b.com...
Subject

It appears that one of the back up safety controls is to use back up
diesel engine/generator sets to provide control power during emergency
reactor shut downs.

In Japan, these engine/generator sets have been wiped out by the tsunamis.

So much for that back up.

Here in SoCal, we have the San Onofre nuclear generating station right on
the shore line about half way between Los Angeles and San Diego.

This is residential country with some high priced SoCal real-estate less
than 2 miles away.

It also has a diesel engine/generator sets to provide control power during
emergency reactor shut down.

Earlier this week the plant mgr was interviewed one of the local TV
stations.

Plant mgr was very proud of the San Onofre design improvements in recent
years including the construction of a 30 ft high wall and underground
diesel storage tanks.

A couple of thoughts:

1) Are the diesels automatically started by a clutch and spinning flywheel
approach used by the Las Vegas casinos 50+ years ago, or are they
depending on a standard cranking motor and battery?

Cranking motor and battery is less costly.

2) I personally question whether a 30 ft retaining wall is enough,
probably needs at least another 5-7 ft.

3) How do you build a safe diesel fuel storage vessel underground in
earthquake country?

As we are finding out, there is a lot of uncharted nuclear energy
territory out there.

I think California should shut down all nuclear facilities and go back to
conventional ways of generating elecricity. I suspect it is only a matter
of time before this polution cutter will bite you in the ass like all of the
others have. California seems to believe it can live in a cleaner
environment than the rest of the country but obviousely cannot afford or
engeneer methods support those wishes.

On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 08:06:23 -0500, "Leon"
wrote:


"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
eb.com...
Subject

It appears that one of the back up safety controls is to use back up
diesel engine/generator sets to provide control power during emergency
reactor shut downs.

In Japan, these engine/generator sets have been wiped out by the tsunamis.

So much for that back up.

Here in SoCal, we have the San Onofre nuclear generating station right on
the shore line about half way between Los Angeles and San Diego.

This is residential country with some high priced SoCal real-estate less
than 2 miles away.

It also has a diesel engine/generator sets to provide control power during
emergency reactor shut down.

Earlier this week the plant mgr was interviewed one of the local TV
stations.

Plant mgr was very proud of the San Onofre design improvements in recent
years including the construction of a 30 ft high wall and underground
diesel storage tanks.

A couple of thoughts:

1) Are the diesels automatically started by a clutch and spinning flywheel
approach used by the Las Vegas casinos 50+ years ago, or are they
depending on a standard cranking motor and battery?

Cranking motor and battery is less costly.

2) I personally question whether a 30 ft retaining wall is enough,
probably needs at least another 5-7 ft.

3) How do you build a safe diesel fuel storage vessel underground in
earthquake country?

As we are finding out, there is a lot of uncharted nuclear energy
territory out there.

I think California should shut down all nuclear facilities and go back to
conventional ways of generating elecricity. I suspect it is only a matter
of time before this polution cutter will bite you in the ass like all of the
others have. California seems to believe it can live in a cleaner
environment than the rest of the country but obviousely cannot afford or
engeneer methods support those wishes.

Yeah, let's see how those idiot greenies like living with coalfired
plants spewing godawful amounts of heat and pollution all over them
while mile-long trains of coal run hourly to the plants to keep them
operating.

Let's see how long Arizona and Nevada put up with the acid rain from
them.

Boy, howdy! This oughta be _good_!

--
A paranoid is someone who knows a little of what's going on.
-- William S. Burroughs

On 03/17/2011 08:01 AM, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 08:06:23 -0500,
wrote:


"Lew wrote in message
b.com...
Subject

It appears that one of the back up safety controls is to use back up
diesel engine/generator sets to provide control power during emergency
reactor shut downs.

In Japan, these engine/generator sets have been wiped out by the tsunamis.

So much for that back up.

Here in SoCal, we have the San Onofre nuclear generating station right on
the shore line about half way between Los Angeles and San Diego.

This is residential country with some high priced SoCal real-estate less
than 2 miles away.

It also has a diesel engine/generator sets to provide control power during
emergency reactor shut down.

Earlier this week the plant mgr was interviewed one of the local TV
stations.

Plant mgr was very proud of the San Onofre design improvements in recent
years including the construction of a 30 ft high wall and underground
diesel storage tanks.

A couple of thoughts:

1) Are the diesels automatically started by a clutch and spinning flywheel
approach used by the Las Vegas casinos 50+ years ago, or are they
depending on a standard cranking motor and battery?

Cranking motor and battery is less costly.

2) I personally question whether a 30 ft retaining wall is enough,
probably needs at least another 5-7 ft.

3) How do you build a safe diesel fuel storage vessel underground in
earthquake country?

As we are finding out, there is a lot of uncharted nuclear energy
territory out there.

I think California should shut down all nuclear facilities and go back to
conventional ways of generating elecricity. I suspect it is only a matter
of time before this polution cutter will bite you in the ass like all of the
others have. California seems to believe it can live in a cleaner
environment than the rest of the country but obviousely cannot afford or
engeneer methods support those wishes.

Yeah, let's see how those idiot greenies like living with coalfired
plants spewing godawful amounts of heat and pollution all over them
while mile-long trains of coal run hourly to the plants to keep them
operating.

Let's see how long Arizona and Nevada put up with the acid rain from
them.

Rain? Arizona?


Boy, howdy! This oughta be _good_!

--
A paranoid is someone who knows a little of what's going on.
-- William S. Burroughs

On 3/17/2011 8:01 AM, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 08:06:23 -0500,
wrote:


"Lew wrote in message
b.com...
Subject

It appears that one of the back up safety controls is to use back up
diesel engine/generator sets to provide control power during emergency
reactor shut downs.

In Japan, these engine/generator sets have been wiped out by the tsunamis.

So much for that back up.

Here in SoCal, we have the San Onofre nuclear generating station right on
the shore line about half way between Los Angeles and San Diego.

This is residential country with some high priced SoCal real-estate less
than 2 miles away.

It also has a diesel engine/generator sets to provide control power during
emergency reactor shut down.

Earlier this week the plant mgr was interviewed one of the local TV
stations.

Plant mgr was very proud of the San Onofre design improvements in recent
years including the construction of a 30 ft high wall and underground
diesel storage tanks.

A couple of thoughts:

1) Are the diesels automatically started by a clutch and spinning flywheel
approach used by the Las Vegas casinos 50+ years ago, or are they
depending on a standard cranking motor and battery?

Cranking motor and battery is less costly.

2) I personally question whether a 30 ft retaining wall is enough,
probably needs at least another 5-7 ft.

3) How do you build a safe diesel fuel storage vessel underground in
earthquake country?

As we are finding out, there is a lot of uncharted nuclear energy
territory out there.

I think California should shut down all nuclear facilities and go back to
conventional ways of generating elecricity. I suspect it is only a matter
of time before this polution cutter will bite you in the ass like all of the
others have. California seems to believe it can live in a cleaner
environment than the rest of the country but obviousely cannot afford or
engeneer methods support those wishes.

Yeah, let's see how those idiot greenies like living with coalfired
plants spewing godawful amounts of heat and pollution all over them
while mile-long trains of coal run hourly to the plants to keep them
operating.

Coal-fired power plants already produce half of USA's electricity.
EPA-mandated scrubbers make the plants low polluters. They are already
running near capacity. They, and all other sources for generating
electricity combined, don't have enough reserve capacity to pick up the
slack if the nuclear power plants were all taken off line. And it takes
years not months to build new plants.

One thing most people don't realize is that radioactive materials are
present in fossil fuels. Coal and oil fired power plants release more
radiation into the environment than a nuclear power plant does.

Let's see how long Arizona and Nevada put up with the acid rain from
them.

Boy, howdy! This oughta be _good_!

--
A paranoid is someone who knows a little of what's going on.
-- William S. Burroughs

On 3/17/2011 1:37 PM, Just Wondering wrote:
On 3/17/2011 8:01 AM, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 08:06:23 -0500,
wrote:


"Lew wrote in message
b.com...
Subject

It appears that one of the back up safety controls is to use back up
diesel engine/generator sets to provide control power during emergency
reactor shut downs.

In Japan, these engine/generator sets have been wiped out by the
tsunamis.

So much for that back up.

Here in SoCal, we have the San Onofre nuclear generating station
right on
the shore line about half way between Los Angeles and San Diego.

This is residential country with some high priced SoCal real-estate
less
than 2 miles away.

It also has a diesel engine/generator sets to provide control power
during
emergency reactor shut down.

Earlier this week the plant mgr was interviewed one of the local TV
stations.

Plant mgr was very proud of the San Onofre design improvements in
recent
years including the construction of a 30 ft high wall and underground
diesel storage tanks.

A couple of thoughts:

1) Are the diesels automatically started by a clutch and spinning
flywheel
approach used by the Las Vegas casinos 50+ years ago, or are they
depending on a standard cranking motor and battery?

Cranking motor and battery is less costly.

2) I personally question whether a 30 ft retaining wall is enough,
probably needs at least another 5-7 ft.

3) How do you build a safe diesel fuel storage vessel underground in
earthquake country?

As we are finding out, there is a lot of uncharted nuclear energy
territory out there.

I think California should shut down all nuclear facilities and go
back to
conventional ways of generating elecricity. I suspect it is only a
matter
of time before this polution cutter will bite you in the ass like all
of the
others have. California seems to believe it can live in a cleaner
environment than the rest of the country but obviousely cannot afford or
engeneer methods support those wishes.

Yeah, let's see how those idiot greenies like living with coalfired
plants spewing godawful amounts of heat and pollution all over them
while mile-long trains of coal run hourly to the plants to keep them
operating.

Coal-fired power plants already produce half of USA's electricity.
EPA-mandated scrubbers make the plants low polluters. They are already
running near capacity. They, and all other sources for generating
electricity combined, don't have enough reserve capacity to pick up the
slack if the nuclear power plants were all taken off line. And it takes
years not months to build new plants.

One thing most people don't realize is that radioactive materials are
present in fossil fuels. Coal and oil fired power plants release more
radiation into the environment than a nuclear power plant does.

Let's see how long Arizona and Nevada put up with the acid rain from
them.

Boy, howdy! This oughta be _good_!

--
A paranoid is someone who knows a little of what's going on.
-- William S. Burroughs

One thing people do not realize is they can not get away from natural
radiation. Radiation comes from concrete, stone, and many other
sources. Then don't forget we are bombarded by radiation of the sun
and other sources every minute of our lives.

There is probably more radiation from the Containment vessel of a Nuke
plant than from the reaction that is contained in side.

Live with it there as there is no way to live with out it.

"k-nuttle" wrote in message
...

One thing people do not realize is they can not get away from natural
radiation. Radiation comes from concrete, stone, and many other sources.
Then don't forget we are bombarded by radiation of the sun and other
sources every minute of our lives.

There is probably more radiation from the Containment vessel of a Nuke
plant than from the reaction that is contained in side.


Staggeringly wrong.

Tim W

"Just Wondering" wrote in message
...


One thing most people don't realize is that radioactive materials are
present in fossil fuels. Coal and oil fired power plants release more
radiation into the environment than a nuclear power plant does.


What? That's pretty misleading. A bit like saying a smoky old diesel is
environmentally sound because it doesn't give you any problem with
radioactive waste that has to be stored securely for several hundred years
because it is so dangerous for the environment.

Tim W

On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 18:54:17 -0000, "Tim W"
wrote:


"Just Wondering" wrote in message
...


One thing most people don't realize is that radioactive materials are
present in fossil fuels. Coal and oil fired power plants release more
radiation into the environment than a nuclear power plant does.


What? That's pretty misleading. A bit like saying a smoky old diesel is
environmentally sound because it doesn't give you any problem with
radioactive waste that has to be stored securely for several hundred years
because it is so dangerous for the environment.

A smoky old diesel is safer than a smokeless new diesel becaust the
old one put bigass particulates (aka: soot) into the air which
immediately fell to the ground and stayed there. Now, with pollution
controls and low-sulfur fuel (at nearly twice the price as old), the
output from the diesel exhaust is more deadly because it stays in the
air. It _became_ an air pollution problem when it was just an eyesore
before. A truckdrivin' friend of mine is ****ed over that.

--
A paranoid is someone who knows a little of what's going on.
-- William S. Burroughs

On 3/17/2011 11:54 AM, Tim W wrote:
"Just wrote in message
...


One thing most people don't realize is that radioactive materials are
present in fossil fuels. Coal and oil fired power plants release more
radiation into the environment than a nuclear power plant does.


What? That's pretty misleading. A bit like saying a smoky old diesel is
environmentally sound because it doesn't give you any problem with
radioactive waste that has to be stored securely for several hundred years
because it is so dangerous for the environment.


You're being misleading yourself by selectively clipping the prior
posts. I was responding to "Leon"'s comment where he said, "I think
California should shut down all nuclear facilities and go back to
conventional ways of generating elecricity." I don't see how it's
misleading to point out a couple of fallacies in that statement.

Other countries recycle their spent nuclear rods, resulting in far less
radioactive waste. Why doesn't the USA?

On 3/17/2011 11:54 AM, Tim W wrote:
"Just wrote in message
...


One thing most people don't realize is that radioactive materials are
present in fossil fuels. Coal and oil fired power plants release more
radiation into the environment than a nuclear power plant does.


What? That's pretty misleading. A bit like saying a smoky old diesel is
environmentally sound because it doesn't give you any problem with
radioactive waste that has to be stored securely for several hundred years
because it is so dangerous for the environment.


From December 13, 2007 Scientific American article, "Coal Ash Is More
Radioactive than Nuclear Waste",

.... the waste produced by coal plants is actually more radioactive than
that generated by their nuclear counterparts. In fact, the fly ash
emitted by a power plant—a by-product from burning coal for
electricity—carries into the surrounding environment 100 times more
radiation than a nuclear power plant producing the same amount of energy.
....
The chances of experiencing adverse health effects from radiation are
slim for both nuclear and coal-fired power plants—they're just somewhat
higher for the coal ones. "You're talking about one chance in a billion
for nuclear power plants," Christensen says. "And it's one in 10 million
to one in a hundred million for coal plants."
....
As a general clarification, ounce for ounce, coal ash released from a
power plant delivers more radiation than nuclear waste shielded via
water or dry cask storage.

The whole article can be read at
http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...-nuclear-waste

"Just Wondering" wrote in message
...


Coal-fired power plants already produce half of USA's electricity.
EPA-mandated scrubbers make the plants low polluters.

Low by whose standards? The mercury accumulating in our food chain is not
exactly healthy stuff, and one in six American babies has been exposed to
dangerous levels of mercury in utero.

One thing most people don't realize is that radioactive materials are
present in fossil fuels. Coal and oil fired power plants release more
radiation into the environment than a nuclear power plant does.

Until there is an accident, then the nuke plant catches up, including the
ones the Navy has had a few little accidents with resulting in things like
contaminated water being released into harbors. The Navy took one of its
early and unsuccessful submarine reactors, encased it in stainless steel,
and sunk it in the ocean. They went looking for it years later, couldn't
find it.

And then there is the issue of what to do with the spent fuel....

"Just Wondering" wrote in message
...
On 3/17/2011 8:01 AM, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 08:06:23 -0500,
wrote:


"Lew wrote in message
b.com...
Subject

It appears that one of the back up safety controls is to use back up
diesel engine/generator sets to provide control power during emergency
reactor shut downs.

In Japan, these engine/generator sets have been wiped out by the
tsunamis.

So much for that back up.

Here in SoCal, we have the San Onofre nuclear generating station right
on
the shore line about half way between Los Angeles and San Diego.

This is residential country with some high priced SoCal real-estate
less
than 2 miles away.

It also has a diesel engine/generator sets to provide control power
during
emergency reactor shut down.

Earlier this week the plant mgr was interviewed one of the local TV
stations.

Plant mgr was very proud of the San Onofre design improvements in
recent
years including the construction of a 30 ft high wall and underground
diesel storage tanks.

A couple of thoughts:

1) Are the diesels automatically started by a clutch and spinning
flywheel
approach used by the Las Vegas casinos 50+ years ago, or are they
depending on a standard cranking motor and battery?

Cranking motor and battery is less costly.

2) I personally question whether a 30 ft retaining wall is enough,
probably needs at least another 5-7 ft.

3) How do you build a safe diesel fuel storage vessel underground in
earthquake country?

As we are finding out, there is a lot of uncharted nuclear energy
territory out there.

I think California should shut down all nuclear facilities and go back
to
conventional ways of generating elecricity. I suspect it is only a
matter
of time before this polution cutter will bite you in the ass like all of
the
others have. California seems to believe it can live in a cleaner
environment than the rest of the country but obviousely cannot afford or
engeneer methods support those wishes.

Yeah, let's see how those idiot greenies like living with coalfired
plants spewing godawful amounts of heat and pollution all over them
while mile-long trains of coal run hourly to the plants to keep them
operating.

Coal-fired power plants already produce half of USA's electricity.
EPA-mandated scrubbers make the plants low polluters. They are already
running near capacity. They, and all other sources for generating
electricity combined, don't have enough reserve capacity to pick up the
slack if the nuclear power plants were all taken off line. And it takes
years not months to build new plants.

One thing most people don't realize is that radioactive materials are
present in fossil fuels. Coal and oil fired power plants release more
radiation into the environment than a nuclear power plant does.

Even your granite counter tops emit radiation but as far as releasing
radiation from the oil fired plants your statement is not true when compared
to 3 mile island, Chernoble and or the Japan facility and that is the
problem.

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 08:06:23 -0500, "Leon"
wrote:


"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
web.com...
Subject

It appears that one of the back up safety controls is to use back up
diesel engine/generator sets to provide control power during emergency
reactor shut downs.

In Japan, these engine/generator sets have been wiped out by the
tsunamis.

So much for that back up.

Here in SoCal, we have the San Onofre nuclear generating station right
on
the shore line about half way between Los Angeles and San Diego.

This is residential country with some high priced SoCal real-estate less
than 2 miles away.

It also has a diesel engine/generator sets to provide control power
during
emergency reactor shut down.

Earlier this week the plant mgr was interviewed one of the local TV
stations.

Plant mgr was very proud of the San Onofre design improvements in recent
years including the construction of a 30 ft high wall and underground
diesel storage tanks.

A couple of thoughts:

1) Are the diesels automatically started by a clutch and spinning
flywheel
approach used by the Las Vegas casinos 50+ years ago, or are they
depending on a standard cranking motor and battery?

Cranking motor and battery is less costly.

2) I personally question whether a 30 ft retaining wall is enough,
probably needs at least another 5-7 ft.

3) How do you build a safe diesel fuel storage vessel underground in
earthquake country?

As we are finding out, there is a lot of uncharted nuclear energy
territory out there.

I think California should shut down all nuclear facilities and go back to
conventional ways of generating elecricity. I suspect it is only a matter
of time before this polution cutter will bite you in the ass like all of
the
others have. California seems to believe it can live in a cleaner
environment than the rest of the country but obviousely cannot afford or
engeneer methods support those wishes.

Yeah, let's see how those idiot greenies like living with coalfired
plants spewing godawful amounts of heat and pollution all over them
while mile-long trains of coal run hourly to the plants to keep them
operating.

Let's see how long Arizona and Nevada put up with the acid rain from
them.

Boy, howdy! This oughta be _good_!

I believe they would prefer that than a scenario like Japan has right now.

On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 16:54:51 -0500, "Leon"
wrote:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 08:06:23 -0500, "Leon"
wrote:


"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
aweb.com...
Subject

It appears that one of the back up safety controls is to use back up
diesel engine/generator sets to provide control power during emergency
reactor shut downs.

In Japan, these engine/generator sets have been wiped out by the
tsunamis.

So much for that back up.

Here in SoCal, we have the San Onofre nuclear generating station right
on
the shore line about half way between Los Angeles and San Diego.

This is residential country with some high priced SoCal real-estate less
than 2 miles away.

It also has a diesel engine/generator sets to provide control power
during
emergency reactor shut down.

Earlier this week the plant mgr was interviewed one of the local TV
stations.

Plant mgr was very proud of the San Onofre design improvements in recent
years including the construction of a 30 ft high wall and underground
diesel storage tanks.

A couple of thoughts:

1) Are the diesels automatically started by a clutch and spinning
flywheel
approach used by the Las Vegas casinos 50+ years ago, or are they
depending on a standard cranking motor and battery?

Cranking motor and battery is less costly.

2) I personally question whether a 30 ft retaining wall is enough,
probably needs at least another 5-7 ft.

3) How do you build a safe diesel fuel storage vessel underground in
earthquake country?

As we are finding out, there is a lot of uncharted nuclear energy
territory out there.

I think California should shut down all nuclear facilities and go back to
conventional ways of generating elecricity. I suspect it is only a matter
of time before this polution cutter will bite you in the ass like all of
the
others have. California seems to believe it can live in a cleaner
environment than the rest of the country but obviousely cannot afford or
engeneer methods support those wishes.

Yeah, let's see how those idiot greenies like living with coalfired
plants spewing godawful amounts of heat and pollution all over them
while mile-long trains of coal run hourly to the plants to keep them
operating.

Let's see how long Arizona and Nevada put up with the acid rain from
them.

Boy, howdy! This oughta be _good_!

I believe they would prefer that than a scenario like Japan has right now.

Prefer which, the hysteria over radiation or the actual losses from
the earthquake AND the tsunami?

--
A paranoid is someone who knows a little of what's going on.
-- William S. Burroughs

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 16:54:51 -0500, "Leon"
wrote:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 08:06:23 -0500, "Leon"
wrote:


"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
raweb.com...
Subject

It appears that one of the back up safety controls is to use back up
diesel engine/generator sets to provide control power during emergency
reactor shut downs.

In Japan, these engine/generator sets have been wiped out by the
tsunamis.

So much for that back up.

Here in SoCal, we have the San Onofre nuclear generating station right
on
the shore line about half way between Los Angeles and San Diego.

This is residential country with some high priced SoCal real-estate
less
than 2 miles away.

It also has a diesel engine/generator sets to provide control power
during
emergency reactor shut down.

Earlier this week the plant mgr was interviewed one of the local TV
stations.

Plant mgr was very proud of the San Onofre design improvements in
recent
years including the construction of a 30 ft high wall and underground
diesel storage tanks.

A couple of thoughts:

1) Are the diesels automatically started by a clutch and spinning
flywheel
approach used by the Las Vegas casinos 50+ years ago, or are they
depending on a standard cranking motor and battery?

Cranking motor and battery is less costly.

2) I personally question whether a 30 ft retaining wall is enough,
probably needs at least another 5-7 ft.

3) How do you build a safe diesel fuel storage vessel underground in
earthquake country?

As we are finding out, there is a lot of uncharted nuclear energy
territory out there.

I think California should shut down all nuclear facilities and go back
to
conventional ways of generating elecricity. I suspect it is only a
matter
of time before this polution cutter will bite you in the ass like all of
the
others have. California seems to believe it can live in a cleaner
environment than the rest of the country but obviousely cannot afford or
engeneer methods support those wishes.

Yeah, let's see how those idiot greenies like living with coalfired
plants spewing godawful amounts of heat and pollution all over them
while mile-long trains of coal run hourly to the plants to keep them
operating.

Let's see how long Arizona and Nevada put up with the acid rain from
them.

Boy, howdy! This oughta be _good_!

I believe they would prefer that than a scenario like Japan has right now.

Prefer which, the hysteria over radiation or the actual losses from
the earthquake AND the tsunami?

Wait and see what happens from the fall out and the hysteria from fall out
that is going to happen.

On 2011-03-17 11:01:13 -0400, Larry Jaques
said:

A paranoid is someone who knows a little of what's going on.
-- William S. Burroughs

More than a little truth there!

So much for that back up.

At Chernobyl, the nuke reacto'rs controls ran on electricity FROM THE
GRID. That boggles my mind, that a nuke plant used to generate huge
amounts of electricity ran on electricity off the grid. The backup
generators took over 1 minute after grid failure to generate power,
which was too long. So they were doing an experiment to see if the
turbines had enough angular momentum after shutdown to produce enough
power to run the controls to bridge the one-minute gap. They botched
the experiment, the rest is history.

Hurricane Katrina caused a a surge of water in Lake Pontchetrain that
pushed the retaining walls some 30 ft backwards, like pushing a throw
rug on a slick floor. Of course they failed.

Mother Nature bats last, every game.

Here's a few good reads:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individ...nobyl_disaster
(Brutal descriptions of the effects of radiation)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_K._Daghlian,_Jr.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Slotin (They did experiments on
"critical mass" using a lump of plutonium, a hand-held lid and a
screwdriver)

On Mar 17, 12:35*am, "Lew Hodgett" wrote:
Subject

It appears that one of the back up safety controls is to use back up
diesel engine/generator sets to provide control power during emergency
reactor shut downs.

In Japan, these engine/generator sets have been wiped out by the
tsunamis.

So much for that back up.

Want some really scary stuff?

http://tinyurl.com/4tvxwgs

A little follow up on San Onofre.

A "whistle blowers" law suit has been filed against Southern
California Edison, operators of San Onofre, by some retired safety
managers.

Seems these managers were told to down play safety violations reported
by operating personel by upper management.

These safety managers, some with 30 years service at San Onofre, were
forced to retire when they would not comply.

Should be interesting.

Lew

"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
eb.com...
A little follow up on San Onofre.

A "whistle blowers" law suit has been filed against Southern California
Edison, operators of San Onofre, by some retired safety managers.

Seems these managers were told to down play safety violations reported by
operating personel by upper management.

These safety managers, some with 30 years service at San Onofre, were
forced to retire when they would not comply.

Should be interesting.

Lew


Interesting and not at all suprising. What would be suprising is if you
cannot predict the outcome, lots more money spent by the government to
verify but with no real change with repsect to that facility.

On Mar 31, 8:06*am, "Leon" wrote:
"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message

eb.com...

A little follow up on San Onofre.

A "whistle blowers" law suit has been filed against Southern California
Edison, operators of San Onofre, by some retired safety managers.

Seems these managers were told to down play safety violations reported by
operating personel by upper management.

These safety managers, some with 30 years service at San Onofre, were
forced to retire when they would not comply.

Should be interesting.

Lew

Interesting and not at all suprising. *What would be suprising is if you
cannot predict the outcome, lots more money spent by the government to
verify but with no real change with repsect to that facility.

http://cryptome.org/eyeball/daiichi-...chi-photos.htm

On Mar 17, 2:19*pm, Stuart wrote:
In article m,
* *Lew Hodgett wrote:

1) Are the diesels automatically started by a clutch and spinning
flywheel approach used by the Las Vegas casinos 50+ years ago, or are
they depending on a standard cranking motor and battery?

Big standby diesels often use compressed air start.

--
Stuart Winsor

Midland RISC OS show - Sat July 9th 2011

The really big ones cannot be started any other way.