Skip to main content

View Diary: MotherShip #4: Japan Nuclear Disaster (72 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Sorry, I don't consider the UCS to be anywhere (5+ / 0-)

    near unbiased in their reports and statements.

    There is no mystery as to how the hydrogen got into the primary containment.  It was in the steam that was vented to the containment to relieve reactor pressure.  This was known even before the first hydrogen explosion.  The source was the interaction between zirconium in the fule cladding interacting with steam.  This was also known and reported.

    There is also no mystery as to how it got into the top floor of the reactor building, that is where they vented it from the primary containment to relieve pressure.  As noted above, this minimized the extent of damage caused by the explosions as the remaining lower floors of the reactor building were shielded from the blast.

    By making these issues seem like unanswered questions he is simply ginning up the paranoia and fear.

    Free: The Authoritarians - all about those who follow strong leaders.

    by kbman on Fri Mar 18, 2011 at 11:32:49 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Well then you can ignore it and (4+ / 0-)

      perhaps write a diary sharing your scientific expertise.

      •  That's precisely what I'm doing (4+ / 0-)

        I'm working on a diary titled, "Everything You Never Wanted to Know about Nuclear Containments (But were afraid you might need to ask.)

        It covers the various levels of containment both generically and also in specific detail for the Mark I.  I address their purpose, structure, design requirements, testing requirements, known vulnerabilities and the conditions under which those vulnerabilities become an issue.  I also review the status of the containments at each of the reactors at the Fukushima.

        Free: The Authoritarians - all about those who follow strong leaders.

        by kbman on Fri Mar 18, 2011 at 12:14:57 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Then you're biased (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Cliss

      you are spinning things to put nuclear power in a good light.  Too late for that.

      •  I've clearly stated elsewhere that I'm biased (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Hopeful Skeptic, Odysseus, mithra

        I know that and am doing my best to temper that in what I write here.  My desire is to be as accurate as possible such that my credibility does not come into question as the facts of the situation develop.  My bias is based on belief, not employment as it has been over 25 years since I collected an industry paycheck.  

        If you were to review the various things written on this by myself as compared to the things written and/or stated by folks from the UCS, Harvey Wasserman, and others, you will find that what I have written has been shown to be far more in line with how actual events have transpired.  And while their worst-case scenarios have some basis in fact, these folks consistently pump up the likelihood of these events actually transpiring.  Karl Grossman actually stated that "we're expecting the collapsing of the vessels."  Well, no, not really.  Not anyone who is staying current with the events in Japan and understands nuclear power.

        I personally believe that BWRs are an outdated technology.  Had the industry evolved as intended there would have been new plants coming on line to replace these aging boilers.  I am also as certain as I am of my own name that there will be an industry-wide review of these events and that utilities that are operating similar plants will be scrambling to make certain that they have covered the vulnerabilities raised by this incident.

        Free: The Authoritarians - all about those who follow strong leaders.

        by kbman on Fri Mar 18, 2011 at 12:10:19 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site