31–40 of 106 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They still aren't safe if someone with an AK-47 pokes bits of TNT down the coolant pipes...
Yeah but a person with an AK-47 and TNT isn’t safe regardless of the setting
I am very pro-nuclear in the US (and the EU etc.), but I think the concern about nuclear in potentially unstable nations is absolutely valid.
I used to be pro-nuclear, but here in South Africa, we can't even keep our coal plants running - nevermind nuclear. Last week a 930MW nuclear turbine at Koeberg went down because the cooling pump filters had not been cleaned in years and was filled with fish and jellyfish. Small-scale, independent solar producers and perhaps geothermal or CSP (molten salt) seem to be the only strategies that can work. There will alwa…
But genociding your engineers is probably not best idea.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
you still have disposal issues
The response to this is always "where are we disposing the fossil fuel waste?"
https://qz.com/568450/fossil-fuels-kill-more-people-every-ye...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They still aren't safe if someone with an AK-47 pokes bits of TNT down the coolant pipes...
Yeah but a person with an AK-47 and TNT isn’t safe regardless of the setting
I would argue that most people are not talking about putting a nuclear plant in, say, Somalia. I think most people realize there have to be some preconditions met before you can really even think about using nuclear power. For the most part, if you are able as a nation to construct such a plant, you likely have the security infrastructure to secure the place. In fact, you likely have one of the more powerful security infrastructure buildouts in your region.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. US Navy nuclear engineers are military service members, not contractors, and are therefore part of the chain of command. There are consequences for failing to follow protocol. https://www.navsea.navy.mil/Home/NNPTC/
I see you've never personally experienced the US military... Kidding aside, while many service members do uphold their oath honorably, there's plenty of non-compliance and outright malfeasance without accountability. And to the grandparent, the military does run reactors outside of ships (but typically for research as far as I know)
I see you haven't bothered to actually look at the record. The U.S. Navy has decades of operating many nuclear reactors on ships and submarines with no incidents.
> there's plenty of non-compliance and outright malfeasance without accountability
Not in the U.S. Navy's nuclear program. Even what would be considered minor infractions in other parts of the military are grounds for immediate dismissal. I saw that happen once while I was in the Navy and stationed at a shipyard. A minor administrative irregularity got the reactor officer of a ship fired; he was off the ship the same day and never came back.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Question from a layman: What about "passively safe" reactor designs? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_nuclear_safety
They still aren't safe if someone with an AK-47 pokes bits of TNT down the coolant pipes...
I used to be pro-nuclear, but here in South Africa, we can't even keep our coal plants running - nevermind nuclear. Last week a 930MW nuclear turbine at Koeberg went down because the cooling pump filters had not been cleaned in years and was filled with fish and jellyfish. Small-scale, independent solar producers and perhaps geothermal or CSP (molten salt) seem to be the only strategies that can work. There will alwa…
Actually, when the alternative is fossil fuels (and it frequently is), you only have to understand that, even if your nuclear reactor goes kaboom, it will still kill less people than your fossil fuel plant that does not blow up. And please don't give me "we should all use less energy." Even if we should all use less energy, it's still better to generate this less energy from nuclear, as long as we're using fossil fue…
Personally, I agree that nuclear is probably not anti-fragile enough to be a widespread solution. Political instability is the norm, not the rarity, throughout history.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Question from a layman: What about "passively safe" reactor designs? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_nuclear_safety
you still have disposal issues