91–97 of 97 posts
Can they not simply ship in extra batteries, or are they batteries too large to be moved?
I don't know much about nuclear reactors. To my untrained ear, what Cringely says sounds fairly reasonable. But then, having read a bunch of articles of his linked in the past on computer hardware and software, which I do know something about, I find that what he writes usually falls into one of two categories: (1) stuff that's obvious to anyone who knows what they're talking about and are paying any attention at all…
It's not inconceivable that he was hired to dig up some facts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn't seem to extend beyond energy production. For instance, tell people all about the dangers in chicken mcnuggets, or smoking, or a sedentery lifestyle, and they don't get very excited at all. Even if you quote statistics. Certainly they never go as far as voting against chicken farms. Its got to be the theoretical nature of nuclear power generation that has something to do with it. Its invisible, unfathomable an…
Chicken mcnuggets, tobacco smoke, and sedentery lifestyles are not members of the set of "things that can cause arable land to become permanently uninhabitable". Nuclear accidents are in that set and that is why the public is (rightly) concerned about them.
That's still too intellectual to make most folks even notice. California farmland is getting poisoned by selenium from groundwater wells, but not a lot of folks picketing about that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nuclear accidents are not members of the set of "things that are at all likely to actually hurt you or anybody you know". Sedentary lifestyles and tobacco smoke are in that set, but they lack the novelty and sensationalism that gives nuclear accidents their cachet.
I think that people (self included) are generally more accepting of risk if it's control is within their own hands. Dying of tobacco related illnesses or obesity is mostly within my own control. Dying because a a nuclear reactor leak is pretty much 100% out of my control.
Uhm... the other units at Chernobyl re-entered service for a solid decade after that incident. (Only one of them lasted a decade. Unit 2 caught on fire in '91. Unit 1 was shut down in '96 and Unit 3 lasted until Dec '99.) Cringley's prediction will be wrong. There are a lot of units at that station, two of which are ABWR cores. I would speculate that the majority of these units will return to service.
I think you're right but I give him credit for drawing attention to a big issue that everyone else is ignoring which is Japan's diminished production capacity (rather than focusing on the doomsday meltdown scenarios most of the media are fixated on). Even if they return to service eventually there's going to be downtime. That's going to force Japan to use more fossil fuels which will drive up the price (even more). A…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Chicken mcnuggets, tobacco smoke, and sedentery lifestyles are not members of the set of "things that can cause arable land to become permanently uninhabitable". Nuclear accidents are in that set and that is why the public is (rightly) concerned about them.
Arable land gets people excited? Really? I can't say I don't know anybody that gets excited over arable land, I know one guy, but he's a soil and water commissioner. That's still too intellectual to make most folks even notice. California farmland is getting poisoned by selenium from groundwater wells, but not a lot of folks picketing about that.
Not wanting to change the topic. But why on earth would you even consider nuclear power generation when you are in such a geologically unstable area? Sounds like idiocy to me. Fingers crossed here, could do without another man made disaster.
Probably won't have one -it's dangerous territory, but they are managing it. The Japanese are good at managing things, right? (right?) They have a mix of nuclear, hydro, and other power generating systems to meet their energy needs. Nuclear is one of the cleanest and least disruptive to the environment.
I appreciate these were exceptional circumstances. But to be confronted with a nuclear disaster of any proportion is horrifying. Then it becomes an environmental catastrophe.