Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Common Dreams)   Anti-nuke group says Michigan flood shows the US is unprepared for 'nightmarish' threat of a nuclear disaster combined with the coronavirus pandemic. To say nothing about the giant meteor that is heading straight for the middle of the country   (commondreams.org) divider line
    More: Obvious, Nuclear power, nuclear power plants, nuclear reactor, Nuclear safety, Three Mile Island accident, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Common Dreams, Advocacy group  
•       •       •

1338 clicks; posted to Main » and Politics » on 23 May 2020 at 1:19 PM (2 days ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



47 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2 days ago  
And I hear the weather will be terrible.
 
2 days ago  
Don't forget about the murder hornets and the volcanoes.
 
2 days ago  
We can barely handle the nightmarish threat that is Donnie and today's GOP.
 
2 days ago  
During a Chinese nuclear missile attack? We'll get by.
 
2 days ago  
WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE!

/Guaranteed or your money back
 
2 days ago  
Nevermind that shiat, EMP's from space will fark us!
 
2 days ago  
Don't forget another Simpsons Christmas Album.
 
2 days ago  

Man On A Mission: Don't forget about the murder hornets and the volcanoes.


Some people are saying that Mt Saint Helens will erupt sharks this time.
 
2 days ago  
A meteor splashing down in the gulf of mexico and sending 50ft waves up to at least Virginia, might be an improvement.
 
2 days ago  
Common Dreams

encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.comView Full Size
 
2 days ago  
I had no idea that Dow Chemical was in the nuclear reactor business.
 
2 days ago  
This sounds familiar

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2 days ago  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2 days ago  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2 days ago  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2 days ago  
Giant Meteor 2020!!
 
2 days ago  
Fark user imageView Full Size

2020 got us steppin'
Like our ass is on fire

And our heads are a catchin'
 
2 days ago  
"Oh, come on, obviously that glowing green cloud of radioactive death is just a Democrat hoax to make Trump look bad."
 
2 days ago  
The absolutist "no nuclear anything" bunch is as bone-headed as the absolutist "no birth control ever" bunch. Both groups refuse to live in the real world where nuclear power and nuclear weapons are here to stay and birth control methods (including abortion) are here to stay.
 
2 days ago  
The real double-whammy would be a giant solar flare that knocks out communications and power grids world-wide. Then people would have to endure lockdowns with no Netflix, fark, cat videos, or porn.
 
2 days ago  
Add in IBS and dandruff and you are really screwed.
 
2 days ago  
So a group that is dedicated to the proliferation of renewable energy and has a vested interest in seeing no other form of energy succeed would give a balanced opinion on nuclear power.
 
2 days ago  

American-Irish eyes: So a group that is dedicated to the proliferation of renewable energy and has a vested interest in seeing no other form of energy succeed would give a balanced opinion on nuclear power.


I chalk it right up there with Americans For Prosperity's unbiased labor studies and the NRA's mass shooting propaganda.
 
2 days ago  
What a bunch of pessimists.
 
2 days ago  
Are you kidding me. I know we have enough to worry about but the "nueclur" power have always been a threat , and always will be. Use a map and estimate a three hundred mile circle around each of the power plants in America. That's basically the kill zone. Then put a map of the fault zones  in the continent. Catastrophic flooding  is less of a fear to the plant but in the great flood the water almost got the Eisenhower commissioned plant in Missouri.
Interesting to note is you can't just turn the power off. The reactor has to discharge the electric it is making. Like has to or it blows up. If the lines sending the electricity out of the plant or the buildings that send it are washed out it's the big blam blooey in technical speak.  With a flood you have some warning and hope it's enough time to prepare and shut down a reactor.  But Fast floods like the one in Minnesota? As the weather gets meaner and places flood that never did before it will become a concern.
Of course they  have a plan. Too run a nuclear power plant you have to have a 600 billion dollar surety bond to pay for damages. So hey we got that going for us if we survive.
The power plants are like swords of Damocles but if you want to make it real add in the concept of if there was a nuclear emergency or accident who would be in charge of the response, Trump right?
 
2 days ago  

thehellisthis: I had no idea that Dow Chemical was in the nuclear reactor business.


It's not their business in the sense of selling reactors. The one threatened by the flood is a small research reactor, like a lot of universities use. It's the only research reactor in the state, after the University of Michigan decommissioned theirs in the early 2000s.
 
2 days ago  
Hopefully Giant Meteor will miss the middle of the US a bit to the west and hit Yellowstone Supervolcano. Just end it already.
 
2 days ago  
We should do what they did in Germany: Shut down all of our nuclear plants ASAP and switch back to coal instead while we wait for renewables to get even cheaper. I'm sure that extra 15-20 years of emissions won't be a problem for the environment.
 
2 days ago  

OldRod: [Fark user image 850x805]


Anxiously awaiting my Kaiju 4th of July celebration.
 
2 days ago  

Sin'sHero: We can barely handle the nightmarish threat that is Donnie and today's GOP.


any time the people want to grow the balls to force him out...
 
2 days ago  
Hi, nuclear midriff checking in!

So this is farking dumb. So farking dumb. Know why it's dumb?

Say hello to Waterford 3!

Fark user imageView Full Size


Ain't she gorg?

Anyhoo, Waterford 3 got hit by Katrina. Yep. For a long time she held the record as the nuclear plant that ran the longest on diesel generators alone. Better part of two months, all safety systems ran by diesel. She's fine.

Also, flooding? Seriously?

Let me introduce you to the concept of a dogged door.

Fark user imageView Full Size


Dogged doors are used to prevent water from entering or leaving. That's it, that's the whole thing. The flood? The flood is staying out of these rooms even if the facility floods.

ALSO, CONTAINMENT VAULT DOORS.

Fark user imageView Full Size


Flood, what flood?

ALSO, do they really think that a nuclear power plant hasn't faced a flood before? Seriously?

Fark user imageView Full Size


Hey flood, fark off, and keep farking off.
 
2 days ago  

ClavellBCMI: The absolutist "no nuclear anything" bunch is as bone-headed as the absolutist "no birth control ever" bunch.


The Greens managed to get nuclear power banned in Germany as part of a coalition deal. The filthy lignite burning which has replace nuclear there is killing at least 2,000 Germans every year through air pollution and probably many more.
 
2 days ago  
AAAAAND FURTHERMORE COMMA

Really love these jackasses saying we can't prepare for a flood when there's entire work groups brainstorming on warning systems designed to last thousands of years.

Fark user imageView Full Size


Spikes mean bad. Please do not come here, future evolved humans, there is bad stuff here.

Bonus booty shorts with long term warnings:

Fark user imageView Full Size


Fark user imageView Full Size


/slashy bonus: cats that glow in the presence of radiation is also a suggestion on the table
//clearly our future generations won't chase the glowing cats right? Sure.
 
2 days ago  
Asylum Studios seen frantically taking notes.
 
2 days ago  

mad cowboy: Are you kidding me. I know we have enough to worry about but the "nueclur" power have always been a threat , and always will be. Use a map and estimate a three hundred mile circle around each of the power plants in America. That's basically the kill zone. Then put a map of the fault zones  in the continent. Catastrophic flooding  is less of a fear to the plant but in the great flood the water almost got the Eisenhower commissioned plant in Missouri.
Interesting to note is you can't just turn the power off. The reactor has to discharge the electric it is making. Like has to or it blows up. If the lines sending the electricity out of the plant or the buildings that send it are washed out it's the big blam blooey in technical speak.  With a flood you have some warning and hope it's enough time to prepare and shut down a reactor.  But Fast floods like the one in Minnesota? As the weather gets meaner and places flood that never did before it will become a concern.
Of course they  have a plan. Too run a nuclear power plant you have to have a 600 billion dollar surety bond to pay for damages. So hey we got that going for us if we survive.
The power plants are like swords of Damocles but if you want to make it real add in the concept of if there was a nuclear emergency or accident who would be in charge of the response, Trump right?


This was a little toy reactor, it didn't make power or weapons.
 
2 days ago  

Ringshadow: Hi, nuclear midriff checking in!

So this is farking dumb. So farking dumb. Know why it's dumb?

Say hello to Waterford 3!
...


Say hello to Fukushima Daiichi-2!
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2 days ago  
Well, there was just a news story about how Dumpsterfire Donnie is dying to test a nuke as hasn't been done since 1992. Don't miss.
 
2 days ago  

T Baggins: Say hello to Fukushima Daiichi-2!


Hello, you're a goddamn idiot!

One: That is an old, OLD, OOOOLD BWR unit (sister unit to Cooper, if you want to look that up, I believe) that was scheduled to be taken offline shortly.

Two: The powers in charge of that plant declined building higher sea walls. Most of the nuclear plants in Japan were just fine and the one just down the coast, which had a higher sea wall bested it easily.

Three: IT IS SUPPOSED TO DO THAT. What you're seeing missing are FARKING BLAST WALLS. THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO DO THAT IN THE EVENT OF THE FUEL OFFGASSING HYDROGEN. YOU'RE SEEING A SAFETY SYSTEM WORKING RIGHT. YOU TWAT.

Four: Most of the United States... including Michigan... is not on a ring of fire. No real earthquake risk.

Five: Every plant in the USA has done Fukushima Mitigation plans specifically to address the potential vulnerability of diesel generators.

Six: Fukushima's inner plant didn't flood from the outside. Because of the aforementioned dogged doors and vault doors. The diesel fuel tanks were not behind these safety measures, and see above about Fukushima mitigation. The problem has been addressed.

You see, unlike every other industry (coal, gas, chemical, aeronautical), nuclear learns from it's mistakes.

And maybe you'll learn to shut your whore mouth when gabbing off about an industry you don't understand.

/fite me bish
 
2 days ago  
Fark user imageView Full Size



This was supposed to be a joke but the way 2020 is going it very could be the most likely outcome.
 
2 days ago  

dennysgod: [Fark user image image 728x215]


This was supposed to be a joke but the way 2020 is going it very could be the most likely outcome.


We're literally not that lucky.
 
2 days ago  
We get it. You're scared.
 
1 day ago  

Ringshadow: T Baggins: Say hello to Fukushima Daiichi-2!

Hello, you're a goddamn idiot!

One: That is an old, OLD, OOOOLD BWR unit (sister unit to Cooper, if you want to look that up, I believe) that was scheduled to be taken offline shortly.

Two: The powers in charge of that plant declined building higher sea walls. Most of the nuclear plants in Japan were just fine and the one just down the coast, which had a higher sea wall bested it easily.

Three: IT IS SUPPOSED TO DO THAT. What you're seeing missing are FARKING BLAST WALLS. THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO DO THAT IN THE EVENT OF THE FUEL OFFGASSING HYDROGEN. YOU'RE SEEING A SAFETY SYSTEM WORKING RIGHT. YOU TWAT.

Four: Most of the United States... including Michigan... is not on a ring of fire. No real earthquake risk.

Five: Every plant in the USA has done Fukushima Mitigation plans specifically to address the potential vulnerability of diesel generators.

Six: Fukushima's inner plant didn't flood from the outside. Because of the aforementioned dogged doors and vault doors. The diesel fuel tanks were not behind these safety measures, and see above about Fukushima mitigation. The problem has been addressed.

You see, unlike every other industry (coal, gas, chemical, aeronautical), nuclear learns from it's mistakes.

And maybe you'll learn to shut your whore mouth when gabbing off about an industry you don't understand.

/fite me bish


1) Dow's reactor is older than Fukushima 2.
2) Yes, every meltdown involves bad decisions; how does that argue that reactors are safe?
3) The picture was chosen as a convenient exterior shot, but broken blast walls weren't the extent of the damage. The reactor core melted, and it's suspected that the fuel ruptured the primary containment vessel.
4) I wasn't suggesting Michigan reactors are prone to tsunamis, just rebutting your apparent argument that a Louisiana reactor surviving Katrina means reactors are flood proof.
5/6) The flip side of that is that every plant had safety deficiencies until recently, and the risks were covered up and unaddressed after Fukushima until the NRC's confidential analysis was leaked and NRC whistleblowers came forward. A third of reactors in the US are prone to floods greater they were designed to withstand, and flood risks are increasing.

The bigger concern is safety deficiencies we don't know about. Last week, five portable generators failed during a test at a Louisiana reactor; those were acquired as part of the post-Fukushima mitigation. A couple months ago, some NRC safety inspections were temporarily suspended due to the pandemic, and a couple days ago Trump signed an executive order pressing department heads to make temporary pandemic-related regulatory suspensions permanent.

The US has a relatively good safety track record, and I'm not anti-nuke, but dismissing flood risks and other risks is foolish.
 
1 day ago  
This thread reminds me that I really don't spend nearly enough time studying up on all the things that I should be sh*t pantsingly afraid of.

I should really buckle down and start finding primary sources to become informed and develop continge...hey, is that Murder She Wrote?  Man I love that show.  Guess I'll just sit down here and watch it until it's not playing on TV anymore.
 
1 day ago  
Your right Prevailing winds, I live on a fault line. So I investigated. The san madrid which basically runs up the Mississippi always gets the news. The last time it went off it rung church bells in Philadelphia.  That sucks for us  if you live here but what really takes math is finding out about the reelfoot complex. It is a series of cracks from a not for sure event probably only a few hundred million years ago. The cracks centered around a lake named after a native legend goes into the gulf of Mexico and one vein runs east  Towards the coast. It runs into Canada too.
If you overlay the Reelfoot with the reactor map nothing east of the Mississippi is really safe. The reactors are probably designed knowing this. But Fukushima new they were on an ocean on a fault too.
 
1 day ago  

T Baggins: 1) Dow's reactor is older than Fukushima 2.


And? We're talking about lifespans. It was at the end of its lifespan. It had, like, one fuel cycle left. Lifespan will vary reactor to reactor and depends on things like neutron embrittlement.

2) Yes, every meltdown involves bad decisions; how does that argue that reactors are safe?

Bet you still get on airplanes and use oil, gas, and fertilizer without warbling about whether the industries are safe.

The catastrophic number of dead bodies caused by the Piper Alpha and Bhopal accidents look down on you and shake their farking heads, you disgusting ass hypocrite.

Nuclear is the safest large industry there is and the heaviest regulated. Entire passenger trains disappeared in this event. Entire refineries and chemical plants disappeared. The death toll is enormous.

Fukushima's impact is stunningly limited and its releases are about one eyedropper in a 55 gallon drum compared to the rest of nuclear on this globe. Nuclear power will NEVER be able to release as much crap as nuclear testing and, you know, THE LOSS OF ENTIRE NUCLEAR SUBMARINES WITH PAYLOAD IN THE FARKING OCEAN. Have some farking perspective for five god damn seconds you twat.

3) The picture was chosen as a convenient exterior shot, but broken blast walls weren't the extent of the damage. The reactor core melted, and it's suspected that the fuel ruptured the primary containment vessel.

You literally have no idea what you're talking about. Holy shiat. This is a soup sandwich.

The exterior shot shows the blast walls gone because yes, the fuel was taking damage. When fuel takes damage it offgasses hydrogen. There is an entire safety system in place to specifically release the hydrogen and let it go. Hydrogen will ignite itself just by escaping the system its in. Hence the blast walls being designed that way. The blast walls released. The system worked. The system works this way SPECIFICALLY because the fuel was taking damage.

Primary containment vessel? Bruh. BRUH. That's the farking reactor.

Fark user imageView Full Size


Here you go, straight of Wikipedia. I've been inside one of these farking things. I've supported dive operations in the torus. There is no "primary containment vessel." IT IS THE FARKING REACTOR. The reactor is a thick walled vessel and yes, it is possible that the fuel could punch through the bottom of it if it was burning long enough. Fuel burns at 6000 degrees. It can and will overcome the thick walls of the reactor vessel. But honestly at that point, it's six in one hand and half a dozen in the other. Because look at this design. Know what happens if it did punch the reactor? It goes into the drywell vessel. It's still contained.

We know how to clean this up. I don't think you understand that. It just takes time. And we learn new techniques every time we do it. This isn't farking Windscale in the 60s.

4) I wasn't suggesting Michigan reactors are prone to tsunamis, just rebutting your apparent argument that a Louisiana reactor surviving Katrina means reactors are flood proof.

Every reactor in the USA is tsunami proof now. That's what Fukushima mitigation means. Full stop.
And let me welcome you to something called CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS. The things I discussed, dogged doors and vault doors, are STANDARD on every reactor ever built, because the main threat in a nuclear reactor comes from INSIDE. They just have the happy occurrence of also deterring threats from the outside.The cheerful benefit of only a few companies making these damn things means the designs out there are actually limited. Which is why Fukushima has a sister plant in COOPER NEBRASKA, along with a whole bunch of other places in the damn world. It's a REALLY common old BWR design, it's farking EVERYWHERE.

5/6) The flip side of that is that every plant had safety deficiencies until recently, and the risks were covered up and unaddressed after Fukushima until the NRC's confidential analysis was leaked and NRC whistleblowers came forward. A third of reactors in the US are prone to floods greater they were designed to withstand, and flood risks are increasing.

Well, whoop de farking do, this from someone who has never met an eagle hat, has worked with eagle hats, has no understanding of how plant ranks from the NRC and INPO work, has never had to deal with the fallout of a White Finding, and has never been at a plant that got hit with the rolled up newspaper hard (guess what, I have, hell I've been at a plant that had the 4Chan Party Van on deck for paperwork forging. Just paperwork. It was a goddamn mess, multiple felonies happened). Congratulations on listing a talking point and soup sandwiching again. I'm reasonably certain that like the rest of your post you have no idea what you just said.

Reactors are typically built on waterways (not you Palo Verde, you're the redheaded stepcousin). That means they're prone to flooding. CONGRATS WE FARKING KNOW THAT. NO SHIAT. SOME OF OUR PLANTS ARE BASICALLY UNDER WATER. MAY I INTRODUCE YOU TO TURKEY POINT?

Fark user imageView Full Size


You're saying these things like they're new or alarming to us. Let me explain this to you in a gif.

Fark user imageView Full Size


Welcome to disaster mitigation 101. WE KNOW. We have plans. We have entire farking textbooks. We have entire Codes of Federal Regulation about it. WE FARKING KNOW. Someone coming out of the NRC and saying HAAAAY these plants haven't updated their god damn disaster procedures in a while? SHOCKER. Do you know how long that shiat takes? Do you know how long it takes when it's intrinsically intertwined with design documentation?

FIVE TO TEN YEARS AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. YOU HAVE TO APPLY TO THE NRC IF YOUR ONGOING PLANS HAVE ANY IMPACT ON TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS.

Why do I know this you ask?

Because some of the plants have installed air sampling equipment that's part of tech spec and those goddamn things haven't been made since the 1980s. Do you have ANY understanding about how hard it is to find parts for something like that? Yeah so enter the tech spec change request to move to air samplers that were made in this god damn millennium. Then the plants that do make the swap turn around and sell the old ones off to plants that haven't made the change yet. Yeppers.

Everything you say is a soup sandwich. You are so clearly parroting talking points read from an anti website it's ridiculous. You've clearly never set foot in these facilities. You've never taken NGET. You've never even held a visitor's badge. You have no knowledge of nuclear and how it works, you have no knowledge of radiation and how it interacts with the human body. You have no knowledge of accident mitigation.

See, I've never been on site for a major nuclear incident. But I've been on a nuclear plant property for a major industrial accident.

Fark user imageView Full Size


So I've gotten to see response in real time. I've gotten to see how staff reacts in real time. I was there in the first few days of picking up the pieces.

You know nothing. You know LESS than nothing.

Sit down, shut up, and let the adults talk.
 
1 day ago  

Ringshadow: T Baggins: 1) Dow's reactor is older than Fukushima 2.

And? We're talking about lifespans. It was at the end of its lifespan. It had, like, one fuel cycle left. Lifespan will vary reactor to reactor and depends on things like neutron embrittlement.

2) Yes, every meltdown involves bad decisions; how does that argue that reactors are safe?

Bet you still get on airplanes and use oil, gas, and fertilizer without warbling about whether the industries are safe.

The catastrophic number of dead bodies caused by the Piper Alpha and Bhopal accidents look down on you and shake their farking heads, you disgusting ass hypocrite.

Nuclear is the safest large industry there is and the heaviest regulated. Entire passenger trains disappeared in this event. Entire refineries and chemical plants disappeared. The death toll is enormous.

Fukushima's impact is stunningly limited and its releases are about one eyedropper in a 55 gallon drum compared to the rest of nuclear on this globe. Nuclear power will NEVER be able to release as much crap as nuclear testing and, you know, THE LOSS OF ENTIRE NUCLEAR SUBMARINES WITH PAYLOAD IN THE FARKING OCEAN. Have some farking perspective for five god damn seconds you twat.

3) The picture was chosen as a convenient exterior shot, but broken blast walls weren't the extent of the damage. The reactor core melted, and it's suspected that the fuel ruptured the primary containment vessel.

You literally have no idea what you're talking about. Holy shiat. This is a soup sandwich.

The exterior shot shows the blast walls gone because yes, the fuel was taking damage. When fuel takes damage it offgasses hydrogen. There is an entire safety system in place to specifically release the hydrogen and let it go. Hydrogen will ignite itself just by escaping the system its in. Hence the blast walls being designed that way. The blast walls released. The system worked. The system works this way SPECIFICALLY because the fuel was taking damage.

Primary containment vessel? Bruh. BRUH. That's the farking reactor.

[Fark user image image 800x986]

Here you go, straight of Wikipedia. I've been inside one of these farking things. I've supported dive operations in the torus. There is no "primary containment vessel." IT IS THE FARKING REACTOR. The reactor is a thick walled vessel and yes, it is possible that the fuel could punch through the bottom of it if it was burning long enough. Fuel burns at 6000 degrees. It can and will overcome the thick walls of the reactor vessel. But honestly at that point, it's six in one hand and half a dozen in the other. Because look at this design. Know what happens if it did punch the reactor? It goes into the drywell vessel. It's still contained.

We know how to clean this up. I don't think you understand that. It just takes time. And we learn new techniques every time we do it. This isn't farking Windscale in the 60s.

4) I wasn't suggesting Michigan reactors are prone to tsunamis, just rebutting your apparent argument that a Louisiana reactor surviving Katrina means reactors are flood proof.

Every reactor in the USA is tsunami proof now. That's what Fukushima mitigation means. Full stop.
And let me welcome you to something called CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS. The things I discussed, dogged doors and vault doors, are STANDARD on every reactor ever built, because the main threat in a nuclear reactor comes from INSIDE. They just have the happy occurrence of also deterring threats from the outside.The cheerful benefit of only a few companies making these damn things means the designs out there are actually limited. Which is why Fukushima has a sister plant in COOPER NEBRASKA, along with a whole bunch of other places in the damn world. It's a REALLY common old BWR design, it's farking EVERYWHERE.

5/6) The flip side of that is that every plant had safety deficiencies until recently, and the risks were covered up and unaddressed after Fukushima until the NRC's confidential analysis was leaked and NRC whistleblowers came forward. A third of reactors in the US are prone to floods greater they were designed to withstand, and flood risks are increasing.

Well, whoop de farking do, this from someone who has never met an eagle hat, has worked with eagle hats, has no understanding of how plant ranks from the NRC and INPO work, has never had to deal with the fallout of a White Finding, and has never been at a plant that got hit with the rolled up newspaper hard (guess what, I have, hell I've been at a plant that had the 4Chan Party Van on deck for paperwork forging. Just paperwork. It was a goddamn mess, multiple felonies happened). Congratulations on listing a talking point and soup sandwiching again. I'm reasonably certain that like the rest of your post you have no idea what you just said.

Reactors are typically built on waterways (not you Palo Verde, you're the redheaded stepcousin). That means they're prone to flooding. CONGRATS WE FARKING KNOW THAT. NO SHIAT. SOME OF OUR PLANTS ARE BASICALLY UNDER WATER. MAY I INTRODUCE YOU TO TURKEY POINT?

[Fark user image image 715x476]

You're saying these things like they're new or alarming to us. Let me explain this to you in a gif.

[Fark user image image 468x289]

Welcome to disaster mitigation 101. WE KNOW. We have plans. We have entire farking textbooks. We have entire Codes of Federal Regulation about it. WE FARKING KNOW. Someone coming out of the NRC and saying HAAAAY these plants haven't updated their god damn disaster procedures in a while? SHOCKER. Do you know how long that shiat takes? Do you know how long it takes when it's intrinsically intertwined with design documentation?

FIVE TO TEN YEARS AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. YOU HAVE TO APPLY TO THE NRC IF YOUR ONGOING PLANS HAVE ANY IMPACT ON TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS.

Why do I know this you ask?

Because some of the plants have installed air sampling equipment that's part of tech spec and those goddamn things haven't been made since the 1980s. Do you have ANY understanding about how hard it is to find parts for something like that? Yeah so enter the tech spec change request to move to air samplers that were made in this god damn millennium. Then the plants that do make the swap turn around and sell the old ones off to plants that haven't made the change yet. Yeppers.

Everything you say is a soup sandwich. You are so clearly parroting talking points read from an anti website it's ridiculous. You've clearly never set foot in these facilities. You've never taken NGET. You've never even held a visitor's badge. You have no knowledge of nuclear and how it works, you have no knowledge of radiation and how it interacts with the human body. You have no knowledge of accident mitigation.

See, I've never been on site for a major nuclear incident. But I've been on a nuclear plant property for a major industrial accident.

[Fark user image image 468x246]

So I've gotten to see response in real time. I've gotten to see how staff reacts in real time. I was there in the first few days of picking up the pieces.

You know nothing. You know LESS than nothing.

Sit down, shut up, and let the adults talk.


You sound...stable.
 
1 day ago  

Prevailing Wind: You sound...stable.


Act a fool be treated like one.
 
Displayed 47 of 47 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter




In Other Media
X
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.