What's new

Nuclear Power

Didnt work at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, the fuel rods can burn through the floor.

The Japanese nuclear safety agency says explosion heard at Unit 2 of Fukushima Daiichi plant.

Earlier a cloud of radioactive dust billowed from the Fukushima Daiichi power plant after it suffered its second explosion in three days.

Government officials admitted that it was “highly likely” the fuel rods in three separate reactors had started to melt despite repeated efforts to cool them with sea water. Safety officials said they could not rule out a full meltdown as workers struggled to keep temperatures under control in the cores of the reactors.

The Fukushima crisis now rates as a more serious accident than the partial meltdown at Three Mile Island in the US in 1979, and is second only to the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, according to the French nuclear safety authority. After insisting for three days that the situation was under control, Japan urgently appealed to US and UN nuclear experts for technical help on preventing white-hot fuel rods melting.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said it was “unlikely” that the accident would turn into another Chernobyl, but failed to rule it out completely.
 
Don't let the facts get in your way

Because adequate cooling was not available, the nuclear fuel overheated to the point at which the zirconium cladding (the long metal tubes which hold the nuclear fuel pellets) ruptured and the fuel pellets began to melt. It was later found that about one-half of the core melted during the early stages of the accident. Although the TMI-2 plant suffered a severe core meltdown, the most dangerous kind of nuclear power accident, it did not produce the worst-case consequences that reactor experts had long feared. In a worst-case accident, the melting of nuclear fuel would lead to a breach of the walls of the containment building and release massive quantities of radiation to the environment. But this did not occur as a result of the three Mile Island accident.

Duh.....

Chernobyl was a different type of reactor and was caused by different circumstances.

U.S. reactors have different plant designs, broader shutdown margins, robust containment structures, and operational controls to protect them against the combination of lapses that led to the accident at Chernobyl. Although the NRC has always acknowledged the possibility of major accidents, its regulatory requirements provide adequate protection, subject to continuing vigilance, including review of new information that may suggest weaknesses

Duh II

You attempt to categorize different scenarios as one the same. It is not as you imply.
 
It is noteworthy that Obama says that the US needs to move to MORE nuclear power even despite what has happened in Japan.

Chernobyl was a competely different type of building handled very differently. And these reactors in Japan are far older than current technology.

Compound that with the fact that Japan is highly earthquake prone and eventually something like this was going to happen; you can't engineer everything to the worst case scenario.

The real question is the level of damage that occurs - but even the most pessimistic scientists say that Japan wiill not become a Chernobul.... radiation levels are not even at immediately lethal levels outside of the power plants.

add in that the reactors are on the east coast of Japan and the prevailing winds will blow debris out to sea and Japan's situation is not likely to be catastrophic.

A nuclear emergency is real - but trying to equate the nuclear aspect of this tragedy with the effects of the earthquake and tsunami is a stretch.
 
Didnt work at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, the fuel rods can burn through the floor.

The Japanese nuclear safety agency says explosion heard at Unit 2 of Fukushima Daiichi plant.

Earlier a cloud of radioactive dust billowed from the Fukushima Daiichi power plant after it suffered its second explosion in three days.

Government officials admitted that it was “highly likely” the fuel rods in three separate reactors had started to melt despite repeated efforts to cool them with sea water. Safety officials said they could not rule out a full meltdown as workers struggled to keep temperatures under control in the cores of the reactors.

The Fukushima crisis now rates as a more serious accident than the partial meltdown at Three Mile Island in the US in 1979, and is second only to the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, according to the French nuclear safety authority. After insisting for three days that the situation was under control, Japan urgently appealed to US and UN nuclear experts for technical help on preventing white-hot fuel rods melting.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said it was “unlikely” that the accident would turn into another Chernobyl, but failed to rule it out completely.

To this point..its all speculation.
 
Its going to get worse daily....
Best hope is the containment vessel does its job.

Chernobyl had no containment building.

TMI was brought under control.
 
You should go back under the bridge you live under.

Being union or non-union has nothing to do with what is going on, you should be more concerned about the after effects this disaster will have on people.

You have really reached new lows.

Just remember Karma, and it is going to catch up with you.
 
You should go back under the bridge you live under.

Being union or non-union has nothing to do with what is going on, you should be more concerned about the after effects this disaster will have on people.

You have really reached new lows.

Just remember Karma, and it is going to catch up with you.

What did I say that was so wrong? I was referring to the latests news in case you haven't heard.

Fukushima: Mark 1 Nuclear Reactor Design Caused GE Scientist To Quit In Protest
 
Back
Top