• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Just how long does it take to cool a reactor?

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #21
    Tbh it does seems like pure desperation on their part. Save face and all that doing them harm I think

    Comment


      #22
      why are they using seawater ?
      (\__/)
      (>'.'<)
      ("")("") Born to Drink. Forced to Work

      Comment


        #23
        Originally posted by PAH View Post
        If only they'd built a great big wall around the reactor in the first place.
        They keep saying you can't make things tsunami proof, but putting the reactor, or just the backup diesel pumps on a small artificial hill would have done it.
        Will work inside IR35. Or for food.

        Comment


          #24
          Originally posted by VectraMan View Post
          They keep saying you can't make things tsunami proof, but putting the reactor, or just the backup diesel pumps on a small artificial hill would have done it.
          Then it would have fallen down the hill into the sea.
          What happens in General, stays in General.
          You know what they say about assumptions!

          Comment


            #25
            Originally posted by zeitghost
            I think they've run out of Evian.
            You'll know they're really desperate when they start sending people down the local petrol station to buy all the supplies of bottled water and smoothies.
            Will work inside IR35. Or for food.

            Comment


              #26
              Originally posted by VectraMan View Post
              They keep saying you can't make things tsunami proof, but putting the reactor, or just the backup diesel pumps on a small artificial hill would have done it.
              I suspect they would need to be anchored to the bedrock to avoid being washed away. Building them on higher ground a bit further away from the sea might have made sense though.

              Is there any footage of the tsunami hitting the plant?
              While you're waiting, read the free novel we sent you. It's a Spanish story about a guy named 'Manual.'

              Comment


                #27
                Originally posted by zeitghost
                Not nearly as dirty as a nuclear reactor going off.
                I guess this depends on whether Fukushima results in an explosion as with Chernobyl or more localised event. Chernobyl was a meltdown and a dirty bomb, which made it particularly nasty and hopefully not a model for all meltdowns.

                Strontium 90 was the isotope of choice back in the 50s & 60s.
                Which is produced by nuclear fission in both nuclear bombs and nuclear reactors.

                Comment


                  #28
                  Originally posted by zeitghost
                  I'm particularly impressed by the way the spent fuel pond has boil itself dry.
                  Has it though, or have they used the water from it? Or has it leaked out because the spent fuel pond is cracked or something?
                  While you're waiting, read the free novel we sent you. It's a Spanish story about a guy named 'Manual.'

                  Comment


                    #29
                    Originally posted by PAH View Post

                    If only they'd built a great big wall around the reactor in the first place.
                    If only they had built it a couple of miles underground, as I've been suggesting for years.

                    One of these days it won't just be earthquakes and tsunamis but bombs being used against nuclear power stations, and a fat lot of use a 20 foot wall will be then, or blow out walls, or even three foot thick containment vesssels.

                    And when the power station came to the end of its life, you wouldn't even need to dismantle it at vast expense, just seal off that branch of the tunnel and start a new power station in a parallel tunnel.
                    Work in the public sector? Read the IR35 FAQ here

                    Comment


                      #30
                      Originally posted by OwlHoot View Post
                      If only they had built it a couple of miles underground, as I've been suggesting for years.
                      Sadly that is toshiba's plan for their small 4S reactors. Toshiba 4S - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
                      merely at clientco for the entertainment

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X