British government's plan to play down Fukushima
Moderator: Peak Moderation
Nuclear power stations taken off-line by jellyfish? You really cannot be serious.
Building filters on sea water channels is not rocket science.
Watch out for that flock of black swans! Oh no! one of them has just punctured our inflatable berm...
F**k ups happen. The best way to ensure they will happen is to say 'That can never happen here'.....
As we slide down the curve of global net energy, I predict the number of unthinkable accidents will increase exponentially.
We cannot overcome entropy.
Building filters on sea water channels is not rocket science.
Watch out for that flock of black swans! Oh no! one of them has just punctured our inflatable berm...
F**k ups happen. The best way to ensure they will happen is to say 'That can never happen here'.....
As we slide down the curve of global net energy, I predict the number of unthinkable accidents will increase exponentially.
We cannot overcome entropy.
- biffvernon
- Posts: 18538
- Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
- Location: Lincolnshire
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 2590
- Joined: 28 Nov 2008, 19:06
Of course you could. The point I was trying to make is that with a system as complex as nuclear power is that the number of potential failure modes is so large as to be impossible to design out entirely.DominicJ wrote:Nope, hence my point, you could build a closed loop cooling system into the sea, or even a large lake.
In a world of declining net energy and changing environment it will be impossible to sustain the level of maintenance and adaptation needed to meet all future possibilities. As the reactors age and the environment changes, the probability of failure rises exponentially. The one which will cause catastrophic failure will not be the one which could never happen here, but one of the billions no-one even thought about.
We cannot ever be certain that the nuclear waste we already have can be kept intact for the time needed for it become safe. Our best bet - our least worst option is to bury it in the deepest hole we can dig, in the remotest, driest dessert we can find, where the chance of future human or geologic activity is extremely remote. We need to do it now, and shut down all reactors now, so that we can cool the hot waste enough to bung it down the holes before we run out of oil or money or society.
I very much doubt we will ever see another working reactor in the UK, every penny spent on future nuclear is a penny not spent on saving our environment.
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14290
- Joined: 20 Sep 2006, 02:35
- Location: Newbury, Berkshire
- Contact:
Try this wikipedia reference.2 As and a B wrote:It's not as if there have never been tsunami events in the UK in places where there are nuclear power stations, is it?
The first case is a 21m high tsunami hitting Scotland.
Action is the antidote to despair - Joan Baez
- biffvernon
- Posts: 18538
- Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
- Location: Lincolnshire
- Contact:
And this is not even taking into account the loss of ability to manufacture spares that will go with decline. Nuclear is like makeup on a dying man -- isn't its EROEI supposed to be far lower than it's made out to be? -- except it's makeup that will end up killing him even faster, and spews out poison into the bargain, long after he is dead.RalphW wrote:The point I was trying to make is that with a system as complex as nuclear power is that the number of potential failure modes is so large as to be impossible to design out entirely.
- emordnilap
- Posts: 14814
- Joined: 05 Sep 2007, 16:36
- Location: here
Try this for size:Prokopton wrote:Nuclear is like makeup on a dying man -- isn't its EROEI supposed to be far lower than it's made out to be?
http://evanrobinson.typepad.com/ramblin ... ce_nature/
I experience pleasure and pains, and pursue goals in service of them, so I cannot reasonably deny the right of other sentient agents to do the same - Steven Pinker