Does anyone actually build reactors without containment structures anymore? I doubt it.
KevinC
5337
I can’t remember where I read this, but I heard that this whole climate change thing is pretty dangerous.
I think you mean it SEEMS dangerous
Timex
5339
I probably wouldn’t build a new reactor on a fault line, or somewhere that could be hit by the biggest tsunami ever.
But luckily we have plenty of places in the US that are relatively stable, geologically.
Maybe not yellowstone, or Mt Rainier, or the San Andreas fault.
I also thought Fukishima wasn’t exactly a modern reactor, either. Then again, the extent of my nuclear engineering knowledge can probably be surpassed by careful viewing of the Discovery channel.
Mine mostly comes from this:
Timex
5342
Yeah, it was a 2nd generation boiling water reactor, from the early 1970s.
Fukushima was an old design in an old reactor. Even then it was safe until a monumental earthquake and tsunami rolled in.
If ifs and buts were candies and nuts…
To elaborate: Acts of God happen, and they are sometimes only obvious in hindsight. I’m fine with people saying “the risk of a reactor failing catastrophically has been reduced to a degree that it is rational to build more of them in order to hasten a zero-carbon energy infrastructure,” but when people start to say “they can never fail! it’s against the laws of physics!” [not that you did, but I have heard that line] I can’t help imagining nature saying “hold my beer.”
And even with the earthquake, most of the damage to the reactors could probably have been prevented if TEPCO had swung into action with the required urgency.
At the same time, I understand that the tsunami with its 10,000 dead dwarfs the impact of Fukushima.
One sobering statistic about nuclear power: about 3% of all nuclear reactors have suffered core melt.
Yes, this is a fair point. Also, now I have the image of 10,000 dead dwarfs in my mind.
KevinC
5347
Sure, a lot of stuff is possible. The problem is when people (I’m certainly not talking about you, Gordon) say that we can’t do nuclear because of extremely rare of unlikely scenarios, so we should just blunder ahead on our current path of destruction… it’s just unhelpful, to say the least. It’s like refusing to build yourself a shelter because it could all be crushed by a meteor, so better to just die from exposure to the elements.
Agreed, if it’s nuclear vs. Climate Change Doom there’s no question. If however a completely clean/renewable infrastructure is feasible in the same timetable then there’s a debate to be had. Also, I want a pony.
There is no technical reason not to do reasonably safe nuclear power, and as the cartoon says it’s great on efficiency. We just can’t do it politically. You have to build the safe reactor design properly (expensive!), monitor it (regulation!), be prepared to respond to emergencies (also expensive!), upgrade when deficiencies are found (cuts into profits!), and deal with the waste (not in my backyard!). Once someone figures out how to handle that stuff, with sustained political support and without regulatory capture by plant owners, then more nuclear makes sense. Until then, look elsewhere.
The problem with commercial nuclear power is that it is run as a for-profit business. If you made the engineers and their families sleep in the power plants, and didn’t make them cut costs every day, maybe they could match the safety record of the US Navy nuclear power systems. Smaller reactors, overengineered for “rough duty”, instead of huge scale and built to meet the minimum spec.
I’m pretty sure Homer Simpson does sleep in the power plant…
Timex
5353
So fossil fuels it is then.
Oh, obviously. No chance that solar, geothermal, wind, hydroelectric, even bioenergy could be useful sources with focus and investment. Which, again, is a political problem more than anything.
Timex
5355
No, those technologies are not capable of producing the required base load power generation. Maybe some day. Not today.
So you are choosing fossil fuels. Even though nuclear power CAN produce that be load power.
Maybe you don’t like the choice you are offered. But that’s too bad. That’s the choice you got.
