You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #9: Some corrections [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
FBaggins Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-14-11 07:19 PM
Response to Original message
9. Some corrections
Assuming you're going to build a reactor at all... the spent fuel pools pretty much have to be right there. In the newer designs, the pool may actually surround the core vesser itself.

Putting it somewhere else requires coming up with a way to move highly readioactive fuel somewhere else. It HAS to sit under water for a few years and the safest way to get it there is to create a path from the core to the pool that it entirely under water.

IOW... it most certainly wasn't placed there "because of cost"... it was because it had to be there.

One reason that the "spent fuel rods" were present in the reactor buildings--greatly complicating the situation and greatly escalating the danger--is that THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH THESE HIGHLY TOXIC, HIGHLY FLAMMABLE RODS.

Also untrue. As I pointed out above, moving the fuel somewhere else in the first few years simply isn't an option. It isn't "convenience" or "cost savings" that puts them right next to the core. It's safety. Hard to believe in this situation... but it's true.

Several experts have said that the "spent fuel rods" should NEVER have been so positioned--and should have been sealed in cement/steel containers far away from the reactor cores

I have seen no such "experts".

This disaster has the potential of causing mass starvation in the human population of the Pacific Rim, in addition to a great escalation in cancer rates, cancer deaths and other medical impacts from ingesting radioactive sea food.

Not even close. It's a real problem for the sea area immediately around the plant, but it isn't a significant danger much farther than that. Every ounce of radioactive material in all six reactors only adds up to a tiny drop in the bucket when you're talking about the "pacific rim". Even the MANY nuclear explosions that occured IN the Pacific only sligtly increases the radioactivity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -My assessment of the Fukushima nuclear disaster Peace Patriot  Apr-14-11 05:41 PM   #0 
  - Thank you, Peace. K&R n/t  Mnemosyne   Apr-14-11 05:43 PM   #1 
  - Deleted sub-thread  Name removed   Apr-14-11 05:43 PM   #2 
  - I never understood why engineer types don't design things for the absolute  HysteryDiagnosis   Apr-14-11 05:45 PM   #3 
  - Two reasons  FBaggins   Apr-14-11 06:59 PM   #7 
  - Hey, I have this highly flammable stuff, I need 100 containers to hold it, lemme  HysteryDiagnosis   Apr-14-11 08:15 PM   #12 
     - Great. And then when every part of the fucking airport is exploding, someone will say...  JVS   Apr-15-11 12:13 PM   #32 
        - I see your point. n/t  HysteryDiagnosis   Apr-15-11 12:49 PM   #34 
  - Actually it is simple  nadinbrzezinski   Apr-14-11 10:44 PM   #25 
  - What is the absolute worst-case scenario?  PVnRT   Apr-15-11 11:29 AM   #30 
     - Well, you could certainly fuckin' start by not building nuke plants...  ret5hd   Apr-15-11 01:40 PM   #35 
        - So, you wouldn't allow anything to be built on coastlines?  PVnRT   Apr-15-11 01:50 PM   #36 
           - yeah, that's what i said, didn't i? oh wait...no i didn't.  ret5hd   Apr-15-11 01:54 PM   #37 
              - Such an intelligent response  PVnRT   Apr-15-11 01:58 PM   #38 
  - thank you and rec  sasha031   Apr-14-11 05:57 PM   #4 
  - Thx, Peace Patriot!  snot   Apr-14-11 06:31 PM   #5 
  - reading this makes me sad and sick.....another thought I had  Gin   Apr-14-11 06:59 PM   #6 
  - I think the reason we don't send the spent fuel into space is  buddysmellgood   Apr-14-11 07:17 PM   #8 
  - I was just joking, really. But the joke illustrates the insanity of nuke power.  Peace Patriot   Apr-14-11 07:36 PM   #10 
  - Or maybe somebody watched Space:1999?  csziggy   Apr-14-11 10:02 PM   #23 
     - I had forgotten all about that show.  buddysmellgood   Apr-15-11 09:43 AM   #27 
  - Some corrections  FBaggins   Apr-14-11 07:19 PM   #9 
  - more corrections - Bikini Atoll is inhabitable more than a half century after the H-bomb test  jpak   Apr-14-11 08:41 PM   #15 
     - Inhabitable is a bad thing?  FBaggins   Apr-14-11 08:50 PM   #16 
     - There is a reason why there is an Atmospheric Test Ban Treaty - can you guess why?  jpak   Apr-14-11 08:57 PM   #17 
        - Because it killed everyone on the planet?  FBaggins   Apr-14-11 09:15 PM   #19 
           - That's what they were designed for - Mega Death  jpak   Apr-14-11 09:43 PM   #21 
              - I remember as well.  FBaggins   Apr-14-11 09:46 PM   #22 
     - Bikini Atoll and Russia---did you mean UNinhabitable?  BlancheSplanchnik   Apr-15-11 10:58 AM   #28 
  - The very real possibility that dolphins and whales may be sentient beings  Urban Prairie   Apr-14-11 07:56 PM   #11 
  - There is very little doubt at this point  Cetacea   Apr-14-11 09:12 PM   #18 
  - Pissed off mutant whales will be the enemy of the future!  JVS   Apr-15-11 12:19 PM   #33 
  - I posted this a month ago...  jpak   Apr-14-11 08:25 PM   #13 
  - K&R!! nt  nc4bo   Apr-14-11 08:40 PM   #14 
  - The 'spent fuel rods' label is actually a misnomer...  hayu_lol   Apr-14-11 09:18 PM   #20 
     - no, spent rods really are spent.  Sirveri   Apr-14-11 10:38 PM   #24 
  - K & R. So many people on this board don't even list "the environment" among  Lorien   Apr-15-11 02:07 AM   #26 
  - Good point! I had been saying "50 years to the death of planet earth" but then  Peace Patriot   Apr-15-11 12:09 PM   #31 
  - World Wildlife Fund's assessment.....  BlancheSplanchnik   Apr-15-11 11:00 AM   #29 
 

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC