British government's plan to play down Fukushima

Discussion of the latest Peak Oil news (please also check the Website News area below)

Moderator: Peak Moderation

caspian
Posts: 680
Joined: 04 Jan 2006, 22:38
Location: Carmarthenshire

Post by caspian »

Chris, I quite agree, which is why I said that there are plenty of other reasons to be suspicious of nuclear. My point is that the earthquake/tsunami risk in the UK is miniscule. Let's use the good arguments against nuclear rather than the poor ones.
User avatar
PS_RalphW
Posts: 6977
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
Location: Cambridge

Post by PS_RalphW »

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.
User avatar
biffvernon
Posts: 18538
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
Location: Lincolnshire
Contact:

Post by biffvernon »

It's not earthquakes that we need to worry about. It's black swans and jellyfish.
2 As and a B
Posts: 2590
Joined: 28 Nov 2008, 19:06

Post by 2 As and a B »

Deleted
Last edited by 2 As and a B on 10 Jul 2011, 12:11, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
DominicJ
Posts: 4387
Joined: 18 Nov 2008, 14:34
Location: NW UK

Post by DominicJ »

RalphW wrote:Nuclear power stations taken off-line by jellyfish? You really cannot be serious.

Building filters on sea water channels is not rocket science.
They (jellies) blocked the filter.
I'm a realist, not a hippie
User avatar
JohnB
Posts: 6456
Joined: 22 May 2006, 17:42
Location: Beautiful sunny West Wales!

Post by JohnB »

DominicJ wrote:
RalphW wrote:Nuclear power stations taken off-line by jellyfish? You really cannot be serious.

Building filters on sea water channels is not rocket science.
They (jellies) blocked the filter.
So it wasn't well designed and fit for purpose then.
John

Eco-Hamlets UK - Small sustainable neighbourhoods
User avatar
DominicJ
Posts: 4387
Joined: 18 Nov 2008, 14:34
Location: NW UK

Post by DominicJ »

Nope, hence my point, you could build a closed loop cooling system into the sea, or even a large lake.
I'm a realist, not a hippie
User avatar
PS_RalphW
Posts: 6977
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
Location: Cambridge

Post by PS_RalphW »

DominicJ wrote:Nope, hence my point, you could build a closed loop cooling system into the sea, or even a large lake.
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.

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.
kenneal - lagger
Site Admin
Posts: 14290
Joined: 20 Sep 2006, 02:35
Location: Newbury, Berkshire
Contact:

Post by kenneal - lagger »

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?
Try this wikipedia reference.

The first case is a 21m high tsunami hitting Scotland.
Action is the antidote to despair - Joan Baez
User avatar
biffvernon
Posts: 18538
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
Location: Lincolnshire
Contact:

Post by biffvernon »

And there have been jellyfish since the pre-Cambrian

Image

This one comes from Wales and they want to build a new nuke in Wales!
Prokopton
Posts: 54
Joined: 16 May 2011, 13:31
Contact:

Post by Prokopton »

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.
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.
User avatar
emordnilap
Posts: 14814
Joined: 05 Sep 2007, 16:36
Location: here

Post by emordnilap »

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?
Try this for size:

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
Prokopton
Posts: 54
Joined: 16 May 2011, 13:31
Contact:

Post by Prokopton »

emordnilap wrote:Try this for size:

http://evanrobinson.typepad.com/ramblin ... ce_nature/
Like it.
Post Reply