I can appreciate the drift of your arguments. Per usual, reader comments add even more context and depth.
Re: "Nuclear Regulatory Commission" reports (or oversight even). Sorry, absolutely no faith in our Federal Gov't Agencies these days so no faith in the 'stats' and reports coming from these agencies.
The diesel auxiliary power units at Fukushima were not "sitting on the ground." They were in the basement of the reactor building, which was flooded by the tsunami because it was not waterproof. The Japan Nuclear Reactor Safety Authority had eight years earlier told TEPCO to shut down the six reactors, but TEPCO begged to keep them open. The Authority allowed it, on condition that they get advice from the US NRC. NRC advised them either to move the generators (and fuel tanks) to high ground, or to waterproof the basement, and to waterproof the rooms containing the switchgear for the backup generators. They believed the ten-meter seawall was sufficient, so they didn't act on the advice, but the regulatory agency allowed them to keep the reactors in service.
Reactors of identical design and similar placement a few miles away were also inundated by the tsunami, but they had waterproof basements. Their intakes were damaged by the tsunami, but the reactors were quickly put back into service. The other three reactors at Fukushima Daiichi were shut down at the time. One was damaged by an explosion of hydrogen that had leaked into it from the adjoining damaged reactor. That damage could easily be repaired, and the other two started immediately, but TEPCO has decided to close the entire plant. Details in Chapter 9 of "Where Will We Get Our Energy?"
There were no deaths or illnesses caused by the reactors' destruction, but the incompetent and panic-stricken evacuation caused several, for example by removing critical patients from life support to avoid the billion-to-one chance that they might be injured by radiation. One plant worker got a burn on his foot when radioactive water overflowed into his boot. A jury decided that another plant worker's fatal lung cancer, that occurred several years later, was caused by the accident.
"There are no other reactors in the world that have the Chernobyl design."
Actually, the Soviet Union built eleven of them. Not long ago, four were still in service. I don't know whether they have been closed. The troubles that plagued Chernobyl, and caused its destruction (low power instability due to xenon poisoning and weird control rod design), had already been detected in another one (near Leningrad), but were covered up because the reactors were considered to be a state secret. They were, after all, essentially of the same design as the Hanford plants that made plutonium for the Manhattan Project, scaled up, and for which Stalin had the plans before they were built. Yeah, the Soviets probably DID use them for weapons production by using very frequent refuelings so as not to make too much of the non-fissionable isotopes of plutonium.
The accident was not caused purposely, but it did ironically occur during a safety test. The reactor was inherently unsafe, and the people who designed and ran the "safety test" were incompetent. The staff who were "trained" to run the test had left because the local power authority in Kiev delayed it for several hours, so untrained staff ran the test. Yes, they "purposely shut off" some safety mechanisms to test whether run-down of the generator after steam production ceased would provide enough power to keep the coolant pumps running long enough for the diesel generators to reach full power. That might actually have worked, had the incompetent operators not lost control of the fission reaction.
The UNSCEAR report wrote that there is “no scientific means to determine whether a particular cancer in a particular individual was or was not caused by radiation,” and there is “no scientific evidence of increases in overall cancer incidence or mortality rates or in rates of non-malignant disorders that could be related to radiation exposure.” Then it speculated that there might have been fifteen excess cases of fatal juvenile thyroid cancer during the next fifteen years.
Mankind appears to be too smart for its own good. There is no such thing as 100% safe! The "scientists' today are exposed to the same nutrient-poor food, which affects the brain. The global radiation, which is encircling the world...affects everyones's minds and bodies. What would happen, if there were a nuclear chain reaction that could not be stopped? What would happen with a nuclear plant 30 miles from NYC, if something happened?
The Fukushima Daiichi plant is only a few miles from a fault that produced a Richter magnitude 9.1 quake. None of the six reactors were damaged by the earthquake, nor were any other nearby ones. Faults near New York probably cannot generate any quakes greater than about Richter magnitude 5. That nuclear power plants might be damaged by earthquakes is a slander against engineers that is invented by activists and journalists who know far less about the topic. When Washington Roebling was building the Brooklyn Bridge, he was asked how he knew how strong to make it. He replied "I calculate what I can, and then make it six times stronger." Engineers still do that sort of thing.
I question the intelligence of people today, if they were raised in America. I did a nutritional consultation for a young German student who was taking classes at a nearby university. He said that he was struggling with his studies; thinking that he might have to drop out of school. He was eating the Standard American Diet. I changed his diet and gave him nutritional information; and it helped him with his ability to focus and graduate. Our universities standards are not what they used to be; either. People have lost their ability to reason. Did you ever play chess? Chess is a great teaching device.! It teaches people to think before they make a move. This is something people in industry....aren't doing today! It's too late after the fact. Regarding the waters off the coast of Japan. I read about the Dead Zones that occurred after the Fukushima Tsunami. The rods were put in cooling ponds...and then tons of this water went into the ocean. This obviously created a Dead Zone where there was no life at all; no fish or birds. A man who had sailed there years earlier said that the ocean was abundant with fish; and gulls looking for fish. . After the tsunami, when he sailed in the area again .absolutely no life. I looked at information regarding Fukushima, which gave no indication of much harm. However, I heard and read that the rate of cancer increased in the area; and that tons and tons of radioactive water was being dumped daily into the waters daily; over 11 years
later. Its always the case...don't say anything that will hurt an industry!
perhaps a comment on the 'huge' number of accidents and deaths related to operations of nuke powered naval ships and subs would be helpful... years ago you and I briefly discussed the book, The Danger of Not Going Nuclear, which is buried here somewhere in a box...
Leo
L. M. Schwartz, Chairman
The Virginia Land Rights Coalition
POB 85
McDowell, Virginia FOC 24458
540-396-6217
"Working to Protect the Rights of Virginia's Property Owners"
I can appreciate the drift of your arguments. Per usual, reader comments add even more context and depth.
Re: "Nuclear Regulatory Commission" reports (or oversight even). Sorry, absolutely no faith in our Federal Gov't Agencies these days so no faith in the 'stats' and reports coming from these agencies.
The diesel auxiliary power units at Fukushima were not "sitting on the ground." They were in the basement of the reactor building, which was flooded by the tsunami because it was not waterproof. The Japan Nuclear Reactor Safety Authority had eight years earlier told TEPCO to shut down the six reactors, but TEPCO begged to keep them open. The Authority allowed it, on condition that they get advice from the US NRC. NRC advised them either to move the generators (and fuel tanks) to high ground, or to waterproof the basement, and to waterproof the rooms containing the switchgear for the backup generators. They believed the ten-meter seawall was sufficient, so they didn't act on the advice, but the regulatory agency allowed them to keep the reactors in service.
Reactors of identical design and similar placement a few miles away were also inundated by the tsunami, but they had waterproof basements. Their intakes were damaged by the tsunami, but the reactors were quickly put back into service. The other three reactors at Fukushima Daiichi were shut down at the time. One was damaged by an explosion of hydrogen that had leaked into it from the adjoining damaged reactor. That damage could easily be repaired, and the other two started immediately, but TEPCO has decided to close the entire plant. Details in Chapter 9 of "Where Will We Get Our Energy?"
There were no deaths or illnesses caused by the reactors' destruction, but the incompetent and panic-stricken evacuation caused several, for example by removing critical patients from life support to avoid the billion-to-one chance that they might be injured by radiation. One plant worker got a burn on his foot when radioactive water overflowed into his boot. A jury decided that another plant worker's fatal lung cancer, that occurred several years later, was caused by the accident.
"There are no other reactors in the world that have the Chernobyl design."
Actually, the Soviet Union built eleven of them. Not long ago, four were still in service. I don't know whether they have been closed. The troubles that plagued Chernobyl, and caused its destruction (low power instability due to xenon poisoning and weird control rod design), had already been detected in another one (near Leningrad), but were covered up because the reactors were considered to be a state secret. They were, after all, essentially of the same design as the Hanford plants that made plutonium for the Manhattan Project, scaled up, and for which Stalin had the plans before they were built. Yeah, the Soviets probably DID use them for weapons production by using very frequent refuelings so as not to make too much of the non-fissionable isotopes of plutonium.
The accident was not caused purposely, but it did ironically occur during a safety test. The reactor was inherently unsafe, and the people who designed and ran the "safety test" were incompetent. The staff who were "trained" to run the test had left because the local power authority in Kiev delayed it for several hours, so untrained staff ran the test. Yes, they "purposely shut off" some safety mechanisms to test whether run-down of the generator after steam production ceased would provide enough power to keep the coolant pumps running long enough for the diesel generators to reach full power. That might actually have worked, had the incompetent operators not lost control of the fission reaction.
The UNSCEAR report wrote that there is “no scientific means to determine whether a particular cancer in a particular individual was or was not caused by radiation,” and there is “no scientific evidence of increases in overall cancer incidence or mortality rates or in rates of non-malignant disorders that could be related to radiation exposure.” Then it speculated that there might have been fifteen excess cases of fatal juvenile thyroid cancer during the next fifteen years.
This is summarized in https://vsnyder.substack.com/p/five-myths-about-nuclear-power and described in detail in Section 9.1.2 in "Where Will We Get Our Energy?" (along with details of Three Mile Island and Fukushima).
Van: TY for your understanding. I heard differently from credible people.
Mankind appears to be too smart for its own good. There is no such thing as 100% safe! The "scientists' today are exposed to the same nutrient-poor food, which affects the brain. The global radiation, which is encircling the world...affects everyones's minds and bodies. What would happen, if there were a nuclear chain reaction that could not be stopped? What would happen with a nuclear plant 30 miles from NYC, if something happened?
I didn't add that this nuclear plant sitting just miles from NYC is sitting on a fault!
The Fukushima Daiichi plant is only a few miles from a fault that produced a Richter magnitude 9.1 quake. None of the six reactors were damaged by the earthquake, nor were any other nearby ones. Faults near New York probably cannot generate any quakes greater than about Richter magnitude 5. That nuclear power plants might be damaged by earthquakes is a slander against engineers that is invented by activists and journalists who know far less about the topic. When Washington Roebling was building the Brooklyn Bridge, he was asked how he knew how strong to make it. He replied "I calculate what I can, and then make it six times stronger." Engineers still do that sort of thing.
I question the intelligence of people today, if they were raised in America. I did a nutritional consultation for a young German student who was taking classes at a nearby university. He said that he was struggling with his studies; thinking that he might have to drop out of school. He was eating the Standard American Diet. I changed his diet and gave him nutritional information; and it helped him with his ability to focus and graduate. Our universities standards are not what they used to be; either. People have lost their ability to reason. Did you ever play chess? Chess is a great teaching device.! It teaches people to think before they make a move. This is something people in industry....aren't doing today! It's too late after the fact. Regarding the waters off the coast of Japan. I read about the Dead Zones that occurred after the Fukushima Tsunami. The rods were put in cooling ponds...and then tons of this water went into the ocean. This obviously created a Dead Zone where there was no life at all; no fish or birds. A man who had sailed there years earlier said that the ocean was abundant with fish; and gulls looking for fish. . After the tsunami, when he sailed in the area again .absolutely no life. I looked at information regarding Fukushima, which gave no indication of much harm. However, I heard and read that the rate of cancer increased in the area; and that tons and tons of radioactive water was being dumped daily into the waters daily; over 11 years
later. Its always the case...don't say anything that will hurt an industry!
John
perhaps a comment on the 'huge' number of accidents and deaths related to operations of nuke powered naval ships and subs would be helpful... years ago you and I briefly discussed the book, The Danger of Not Going Nuclear, which is buried here somewhere in a box...
Leo
L. M. Schwartz, Chairman
The Virginia Land Rights Coalition
POB 85
McDowell, Virginia FOC 24458
540-396-6217
"Working to Protect the Rights of Virginia's Property Owners"
I recall the Three Mile incident as it occurred the year I moved back to Ohio (1979).
https://www.history.com/topics/1970s/three-mile-island
Yes, the year mentioned in this post seemed way off. It's listed as March 1979.
MM & JM: Sorry I did not realize that Mark's comment was about the fact that there was a typo. I have corrected it!
No worries, as they say.