Nuclear power

Cleaver

ninky wrote: »

germany is shutting down all nuclear power stations built before 1980.

Yeah, I read about this earlier. From memory two of them were shut down anyway well before the earthquake in Japan and the other five will be shut down for three months for testing. Which other countries are shutting theirs down just out of interest?

You may well be right, as I'm far from an expert in this subject. But if a country has old stations that they have concerns about (as Germany clearly did before the quake in Japan) then maybe they should be looked at. Shutting down stations in the UK, that are presumably deemed safe, seems a bit premature.

A._Badger

ninky wrote: »

okay fair enough but that also means putting all plans on hold for now, no? other countries are already doing this and germany is shutting down all nuclear power stations built before 1980.

Excellent news! Germany was always at risk of an earthquake followed by a major tsunami!

No, but wait....

ninky_2

A._Badger wrote: »

Excellent news! Germany was always at risk of an earthquake followed by a major tsunami!

No, but wait....

well they are at risk of flooding and use the same technology. which seems to be the concern given that many european plants do use the same technology and are near coastlines. a massive hurricane and flooding that lead to landslides could have a similar effect. there have been major floods in parts of europe recently.

swiss government has also suspended nuclear plans.

there are plans for eu wide stress tests on all nuclear plants.

so it seems it is not just the yogurt knitters who are concerned about the safety issues this crisis has highlighted.

A._Badger

ninky wrote: »

well they are at risk of flooding and use the same technology. which seems to be the concern given that many european plants do use the same technology and are near coastlines. a massive hurricane and flooding that lead to landslides could have a similar effect. there have been major floods in parts of europe recently.

swiss government has also suspended nuclear plans.

there are plans for eu wide stress tests on all nuclear plants.

so it seems it is not just the yogurt knitters who are concerned about the safety issues this crisis has highlighted.

What the governments are concerned about is the hysterical reaction of ill-informed voters whose prejudices are being whipped-up by scientifically illiterate media types.

ninky_2

criticism of IAEA is now coming out - apparently headed by a japanese industry person after intense lobbying from tokyo. no surprise they seem keen to downplay the risks.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/15/nuclear-watchdog-response-japanese-disaster

ninky_2

A._Badger wrote: »

What the governments are concerned about is the hysterical reaction of ill-informed voters whose prejudices are being whipped-up by scientifically illiterate media types.

yes far better to listen to people with economic interests in the nuclear industry......

it's all fine...just like having an xray or taking a flight apparently...put a wet cloth on your face, stay indoors and take an iodine tablet. hunky dory.

A._Badger

Anyone looking for a less hysterical reaction to this event can find a useful sci/tech overview at:

http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/03/15/fukushima-15-march-summary/

Warning: It's a bit short on discarded teddybears and Greenpeas spokespersons.

ninky_2

A._Badger wrote: »

What the governments are concerned about is the hysterical reaction of ill-informed voters whose prejudices are being whipped-up by scientifically illiterate media types.

don't be so ridiculous. you really think they care what is in the guardian or daily mail more than scientific experts who are advising them? look if the technology had not so catastrophically failed we would not be having this conversation. i don't think the media have created this crisis or are overreacting to it in anyway. in fact the bbc seems yet to report the upgraded level 6 incident.

meanwhile the company running the plant are evacuating all non essential staff and the prime minister has taken over direct control of the crisis blaming chiefs at the company for trying to cover up the serious level of events.

as for new technology.....if your coolant gets cut off (not just pumps breaking down) due to catastrophic impacts on surrounding areas from natural events or whatever chances are you will get a meltdown. that is clear as we are having not just one reactor but SIX with problems. even if you develop coolant circulation without pumps you don't have to be much of a scientist to realise that coolant can only be effective for so long before new coolant needs to enter the system.

macaque_2

Cleaver wrote: »

But my point is that this is still 'panning'. Let's wait and see where we are in a couple of weeks before we start deciding the future on nuclear power.

There has been a view point on this site that we should wait to see the outcome before passing comment. From a risk management perspective, there is little distinction made between a near miss and a full blown accident. The CAA does not wait for a crash to ground planes when a fault is suspected. The question is not what happened but would could happen in the event of cooling failure. On this particular design of reactor it is evident that the loss of cooling can lead to a catastrophic event.

I have no idea whether modern nuclear reactors can default to a safe condition if all power and cooling is lost? From a risk control perspective however, such a capability would be a big plus (but not the end of the story).

ninky_2

A._Badger wrote: »

Anyone looking for a less hysterical reaction to this event can find a useful sci/tech overview at:

http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/03/15/fukushima-15-march-summary/

Warning: It's a bit short on discarded teddybears and Greenpeas spokespersons.

a blog from a pro-nuclear spokesperson. that'll be balanced then.