Not the nuclear thing again...
- Thread starter AndyF
- Start date
graham
New member
OK
Keeping it simple, for the hard of thinking:
In Japan there is a risk of earthquakes and tsunami.
A month ago one could have said that, despite that risk, no nuclear reactors, of which Japan has many, mostly on the coast, had ever been damaged by them.
In the UK there is a risk of flooding, serious floods take place quite frequently, some events, when a storm surge is related to a high tide, can be very serious. Despite that, no reactors have been damaged by them.
Yet.
The risk of serious flooding is increasing around our coasts, as anyone who has looked at the usage data on the Thames Barrier would know, so, the next time an event like this one happens, what might happen to Hinckley Point, Oldbury etc? If you don't know what caused that event - and you don't - how do you know when the next similar one will take place? Do you know how good the flood defences are at Hinckley? At Fukushima they had a 5 m wall. Not good enough in the event.
Or maybe you'd just like to wait until such an event happened and say that it could never have been foreseen.
Keeping it simple, for the hard of thinking:
In Japan there is a risk of earthquakes and tsunami.
A month ago one could have said that, despite that risk, no nuclear reactors, of which Japan has many, mostly on the coast, had ever been damaged by them.
In the UK there is a risk of flooding, serious floods take place quite frequently, some events, when a storm surge is related to a high tide, can be very serious. Despite that, no reactors have been damaged by them.
Yet.
The risk of serious flooding is increasing around our coasts, as anyone who has looked at the usage data on the Thames Barrier would know, so, the next time an event like this one happens, what might happen to Hinckley Point, Oldbury etc? If you don't know what caused that event - and you don't - how do you know when the next similar one will take place? Do you know how good the flood defences are at Hinckley? At Fukushima they had a 5 m wall. Not good enough in the event.
Or maybe you'd just like to wait until such an event happened and say that it could never have been foreseen.
graham
New member
And this article in the pinko lefty Guardian may give you pause for thought.
whitelackington
New member
North Sea Flood
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Sea_Flood_of_1953
We or the Dutch did not have nuclear power stations then (1953)
but we do now.
Also there have apparently been three Storrega events, there might be a fourth.
6,ooo people died on the Levels in 1607
it does not mean it will never again be inundated.
I think I have heard people say that once a hundred year events are coming round more often now because of
Global Warming.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Sea_Flood_of_1953
We or the Dutch did not have nuclear power stations then (1953)
but we do now.
Also there have apparently been three Storrega events, there might be a fourth.
6,ooo people died on the Levels in 1607
it does not mean it will never again be inundated.
I think I have heard people say that once a hundred year events are coming round more often now because of
Global Warming.
graham
New member
What sort of event do you design for? 100 year? 1,000 year?
That's what made the Guardian article interesting, in that there is no doubt that standards will change over the lifetime of these installations. In this regard, it is worth pointing out that the Windscale fire happened in 1957, bit decommissioning of that site will not be finished until 2037. That's eighty years work just to take it apart.
Take another example: Berkley nuclear power station started construction in 1956 started up in 1962 and was shut down in 1988 (reactor 2) and 1989 (reactor 1). So it had a useful working life of less than 27 years. Decommissioning entered the 'care and maintenance phase' in 2006. Site clearance doesn't yet seem to be in the diary, it's so far off. So it takes far longer to knock one of these things down than they ever work for.
At this rate the country will be knee deep in part-decommissioned reactors in no time at all.
Costs? Who mentioned costs?
That's what made the Guardian article interesting, in that there is no doubt that standards will change over the lifetime of these installations. In this regard, it is worth pointing out that the Windscale fire happened in 1957, bit decommissioning of that site will not be finished until 2037. That's eighty years work just to take it apart.
Take another example: Berkley nuclear power station started construction in 1956 started up in 1962 and was shut down in 1988 (reactor 2) and 1989 (reactor 1). So it had a useful working life of less than 27 years. Decommissioning entered the 'care and maintenance phase' in 2006. Site clearance doesn't yet seem to be in the diary, it's so far off. So it takes far longer to knock one of these things down than they ever work for.
At this rate the country will be knee deep in part-decommissioned reactors in no time at all.
Costs? Who mentioned costs?
AndyF
New member
Here are the flood maps for Sizewell and Dungeness. As you can see, both sites are at partial risk from static floods, to say nothing of conditions associated with storms that can make the situation much worse. In the case of Dungness the building under the blue is...wait for it...where the control room is.
whitelackington
New member
The Japs are now dumping nuclear contaminated water into the sea,
apparently because they do not have any where to store it.
That probably means the end of eating fish caught from the sea around Japan.
Fishermen on the rock & roll.
It is all going to get rather expensive.
apparently because they do not have any where to store it.
That probably means the end of eating fish caught from the sea around Japan.
Fishermen on the rock & roll.
It is all going to get rather expensive.
whitelackington
New member
I still feel the U.K. is now unlikely to start any more PRIVATE new nuclear power stations.
Companies are in it to make money.
Quote BBC
"Asia's biggest power company has been struggling to contain radiation leaks at
the nuclear plant which was damaged by the earthquake and tsunami on 11 March.
Tepco shares have lost more than 80% of their value since the quake struck."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12968812
Companies are in it to make money.
Quote BBC
"Asia's biggest power company has been struggling to contain radiation leaks at
the nuclear plant which was damaged by the earthquake and tsunami on 11 March.
Tepco shares have lost more than 80% of their value since the quake struck."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12968812
whitelackington
New member
The Company who were wanting to build any new nuclear power stations in the U.K. are
AREVA. Our government have repeated that any new nuclear build will have to be entirely private, there will be NO U.K. STATE involvement.
Guess who owns more than 90% of AREVA---- The French State. :-\
AREVA. Our government have repeated that any new nuclear build will have to be entirely private, there will be NO U.K. STATE involvement.
Guess who owns more than 90% of AREVA---- The French State. :-\
SpeleoTrog
Member
whitelackington said:I think I have heard people say that once a hundred year events are coming round more often now because of
Yeah, and I've heard people say that the holocaust never happened, that the moon is made of cheese and that Bros were a good band as well as many other things.
"A man in the pub told me....." is not a basis for any scientific discussion!
whitelackington
New member
Nitrogen is expected to be injected into the Unit 1 reactor,
a process that could take several days,
the Japanese news agency reports.
The inert gas can prevent highly combustible hydrogen from exploding.
There have already been three explosions at the compound in the early days of the crisis.
Nitrogen normally is present inside the containment that surrounds the reactor core. Technicians will start pumping more in as early as Wednesday evening,
said Junichi Matsumoto, a spokesman for the plant operator.
They will start with Unit 1, where pressure and temperatures are highest.
"The nitrogen injection is being considered a precaution," said spokesman Hidehiko Nishiyama of Japan's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency. Nishiyama also denied reports that there was "immediate danger" of an explosion.
Sounds like an explosion in reactor one is imminent,
it was reactor two that was dodgy yesterday.
a process that could take several days,
the Japanese news agency reports.
The inert gas can prevent highly combustible hydrogen from exploding.
There have already been three explosions at the compound in the early days of the crisis.
Nitrogen normally is present inside the containment that surrounds the reactor core. Technicians will start pumping more in as early as Wednesday evening,
said Junichi Matsumoto, a spokesman for the plant operator.
They will start with Unit 1, where pressure and temperatures are highest.
"The nitrogen injection is being considered a precaution," said spokesman Hidehiko Nishiyama of Japan's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency. Nishiyama also denied reports that there was "immediate danger" of an explosion.
Sounds like an explosion in reactor one is imminent,
it was reactor two that was dodgy yesterday.
whitelackington
New member
I believe we have been told that three outer containment buildings have had their lids blown open, each one,
secondary containment for a reactor.
We have not been told that any of the four over heating reactors are melting down.
If NO reactors are melting down and no core containment vessels are breached,
why is it necessary to fly unmanned drones over the plant to take photographs,
surely if there is no nuclear stuff spewing up into the atmosphere it would be perfectly safe for a pilot to fly over the site?
If there is massive radiation entering the atmosphere, then there must be core meltdown?
secondary containment for a reactor.
We have not been told that any of the four over heating reactors are melting down.
If NO reactors are melting down and no core containment vessels are breached,
why is it necessary to fly unmanned drones over the plant to take photographs,
surely if there is no nuclear stuff spewing up into the atmosphere it would be perfectly safe for a pilot to fly over the site?
If there is massive radiation entering the atmosphere, then there must be core meltdown?
