BG Europe Fan said:First, there is two Nuclear Reactors that had emergency shut downs today, 1.5 miles from the epicenter, and Dominion has suspended operations for the time being.
jonfin826 said:BG Europe Fan said:First, there is two Nuclear Reactors that had emergency shut downs today, 1.5 miles from the epicenter, and Dominion has suspended operations for the time being.
Not to pull this thread off topic, but my father has worked at Surry Nuclear Power Station and North Anna Nuclear Power Station since 1981. The plants' reactor buildings are designed to with stand a direct hit from up to a maximum of a 9.0 magnitude earthquake without sustaining critical damage (i think up to an 8.0 magnitude without more than very minor damage), not to mention a 30ft telephone pole flying directly into them at up to 300mph (specifically designed for that in case of a tornado or hurricane.) There is The only instances in which case there have ever been any accidents were pure human error (humanity is, admittedly, not so bright sometimes.) And unlike Japan's power plants, ours our designed to automatically shutdown when any significant event is detected (i think a direct hit from a 4.0 and up, for example.) In addition, Dominion's plants are widely acknowledged as among the safest in the country. I'm sorry if I seem like I'm trying to say you're wrong or anything, it just bothers me that the general public still fears nuclear so much. Besides major major major unchecked long-term human error and freak natural events of MASSIVE proportions, there's almost nothing that can turn these plants unsafe to the surrounding public.
Fin!
BG Europe Fan said:I disagree...
that there is almost no situation in which you should panic over a nuclear power station. People are going to panic regardless, and having a earthquake in the vicinity of a nuclear reactor does warrant concern.
that North Anna is designed to withstand a 9.0 quake. That's just bunk, Dominion and the NRC have public stated that it can withstand up to a 6.2. The NRC also expressed concern on the reactors' integrity after the quake.
that there's almost nothing that can turn these plants unsafe to the surrounding public. Yes there is, it's called politics. That's the root of Japan's nuclear problem. Regulators, not wanting to upset their possible future employers, only adopted regulations that fit the power companies' agendas. It should be noted that the majority of nuclear reactors are made by either a Japanese or French company (Westinghouse is majority owned by Toshiba), and that virtually all reactors in the world have automatic shutdown procedures including Japan's.
that the reactor shutdown because of the quake. They had an emergency shutdown because they lost power from the grid. Reactors require 3 power sources, and 2 cannot be from the reactor itself. The quake had nothing to do with it, Surry kept puttin along during the quake. There is also the fact that it takes longer than 1.5 minutes to shutdown a reactor. Have you tried to stop a bomb mid-explosion? It's nearly impossible, but that's basically what a reactor is, a controlled bomb.
The reason I say Dominion's safety record isn't the best is because of two thing: 1) The fact that Dominion removed the seismographs they had at North Anna, because of budget cuts and 2) They knowingly built 2 reactors over a fault line, although "reportedly dead", and want to build a third reactor there as well. There is also the fact that ALL reactors in the USA are still storing their waste onsite.
Just something to keep in mind.
Youhow2 said:Reactors are normally controlled reactions. Not bombs, even though they are techincally the same. If they fail it will release radiation, not a nuclear explosion...althogh it's theoretically possible to turn a reactor into a bomb.
FixedScoutN said:Science > Logic.*
*subject to change
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.