Re: Car generator to power house

On Dec 30, 7:06 am, "hall...@xxxxxxx" <hall...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Dec 30, 12:21 am, dpb <bozart...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:



On Dec 29, 9:31 pm, "hall...@xxxxxxx" <hall...@xxxxxxx> wrote:

chernobyl, TMI and that event near detroit all had one thing in
common, lack of cooling water caused near disaster........
truly nuke power isnt pollution free. what with mining etc, and those
cooling towers, and warming of rivers and lakes near plants.

That's again such a gross over-simplification of each as to be a
useless description.

shall I paste the causes? for all 3 events? they all boil down to
cooling water too low core overheated......

I know the accident precursors and sequences of events pretty well.
Well enough to know both the minimal similarities and, more
importantly, the differences.

The point is the designs and root causes are so different as to make
the incidents of only marginal use to compare. Chernobyl is
fundamentally so far removed from the other two as to be completely
useless for any comparison whatsoever as to any LWR accident as,
again, the causative reason for the dispersion of fission products was
the graphite fire plume and no containment.

That the other two were LOCAs in a sense is true but of little
consequence other than to demonstrate that the safety systems did, in
fact, despite operator intervention and error, succeed in mitigating
the consequences to no more than equipment damage with no offsite
consequences of significance.

--

well despite your protests TMI came very close to breaching the
containment, which would of created a chernobyl.

containment was key, but isnt 100% in a true melt down.

curious if a reactor around new york somehow failed creating a
chernobyl like situation, what effect would that have to our economy?

how about more cancers?

is it worth the risk?

Despite _your_ protestations, TMI didn't "come very close" to
breaching containment. There has been a lot written by folks of "what
if" and rash conjectures, but facts of the actual scenario aren't
so. Once the relieving shift arrived and restarted the RCPs the
plant was on the way to situation recovery.

And, for the last time, the differences in design between Chernobyl
(and the lack of _any_ containment) mean that there is not a physical
process that could cause a "chernobyl-like" situation from a LWR.
Finis. Over. Done. Can't happen w/o the requisite ingredients.
Requisite ingredients don't exist elsewhere. Believe it. It's so.

--
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: CANDU nuclear reactor failure and possibility of Chernobyl-scale disaster
    ... >> the containment vessel, the design is safe for anyone outside the ... >> fuel would lose it's slight positive reactivity if it melted. ... (noting that it wouldn't have blown apart, ala Chernobyl). ... There is no safe energy (although I note that not having access to ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Too bad Japan didnt use Canadian CANDU reactors
    ... At Chernobyl, since it was a graphite-pile reactor they manage to actually catch the graphite surrounding the fuel on fire and with no containment building around the reactor at all, the whole release was straight to atmosphere. ... there is containment around the reactors themselves and afaict at the moment the major problems w/ spent fuel storage pools. ...
    (alt.home.repair)
  • Re: OT-A Slow Day in The Cabinet Shop
    ... power density than ... they have a multifeet thick concrete containment vessel, like land power plants, capable of surviving a jetliner hit? ... that's a good part of the bulk of land plants, from what i can see from the outside. ... In a sub in extreme emergency if those systems were to fail they can open valves and allow seawater to simply flow over the core, entering and leaving the sub by natural convection. ...
    (rec.woodworking)
  • Re: The Year 2038 Problem
    ... >>The United States does NOT use reactor designs like the one ... Chernobyl did NOT have a containment ... Anyway the real future in nuclear technology is fusion. ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: The Year 2038 Problem
    ... >>The United States does NOT use reactor designs like the one ... Chernobyl did NOT have a containment ... Anyway the real future in nuclear technology is fusion. ...
    (comp.programming)