Saturday, March 12, 2011
Are We Siting on the Edge of a Nuclear Disaster?
They have failed the real world test.
Any release of man-made radiation into the environment does irreparable damage to the environment. I will allow that a tiny release does 'insignificant' damage but I challenge the nuclear experts at DKos to correct me on this.
Also yesterday I heard a Japanese nuclear engineer on NHK say that nuclear plants were designed to survive an earthquake of a given magnitude but only a single event, the effects of aftershocks weren't considered! He seemed to be talking about all modern nuclear plants, not just those in Japan. Please tell me that's not true. I don't have to check with Lucy to know that earthquakes are quite often accompanied by aftershocks. If the standard to which Fukushima was engineered didn't call for the ability to survive at least a 9.0, and a number of aftershocks in the 7.0 range and a tsunami, it wasn't designed to be safe in entirely predictable real world events.
Now I have also read somewhere that San Onofre, positioned on the beach between Los Angeles and San Diego is designed to withstand at least a 7.0! Please tell me that's not true because I think that if it's not designed to survive at least a 9.0, and a number of aftershocks in the 7.0 range and a tsunami, we are sitting on the edge of a nuclear disaster.