Fukushima: Mark 1 Nuclear Reactor Design Caused GE Scientist To Quit In Protest
1–10 of 21 posts
Re: Fukushima: Mark 1 Nuclear Reactor Design Caused GE Scientist To Quit In Protest
#2The title is technically correct; however, it seems like link bait once you get to page two of the article and see:
"Bridenbaugh told ABC News that he believes the design flaws that prompted his resignation from GE were eventually addressed at the Fukushima Daiichi plant."
Re: Fukushima: Mark 1 Nuclear Reactor Design Caused GE Scientist To Quit In Protest
#3The title is technically correct; however, it seems like link bait once you get to page two of the article and see: "Bridenbaugh told ABC News that he believes the design flaws that prompted his resignation from GE were eventually addressed at the Fukushima Daiichi plant."
Yes, but he hesitated to say this was sufficient and said the reactors were still "a little more susceptible to an accident that would result in a loss of containment".
Re: Fukushima: Mark 1 Nuclear Reactor Design Caused GE Scientist To Quit In Protest
#4The title is technically correct; however, it seems like link bait once you get to page two of the article and see: "Bridenbaugh told ABC News that he believes the design flaws that prompted his resignation from GE were eventually addressed at the Fukushima Daiichi plant."
Yes, but he hesitated to say this was sufficient and said the reactors were still "a little more susceptible to an accident that would result in a loss of containment".
The qualitative assessment of the plant's design is outside the scope of what I'm commenting on. I'm referring to the journalistic bait-and-switch which hides a very relevant piece of information (that contradicts the implied assertion of the title) on page two of a banner-encrusted site.
In the context of current events, the title of the link suggests some kind of spectacular negligence.
At the point where the scientist says the design flaws were addressed, [his resignation due to design flaws] is no longer a story that adds anything relevant or noteworthy to the discussion. It's merely a historical fact disconnected from current events.
If the title of the article had followed the content and been focused on the expert sharing their knowledge and discussing possible problems with the design I would have appreciated it much more.
[edit: clarify what is no longer newsworthy]
Re: Fukushima: Mark 1 Nuclear Reactor Design Caused GE Scientist To Quit In Protest
#5The title is technically correct; however, it seems like link bait once you get to page two of the article and see: "Bridenbaugh told ABC News that he believes the design flaws that prompted his resignation from GE were eventually addressed at the Fukushima Daiichi plant."
> he believes the design flaws that prompted his resignation from GE were eventually addressed
Anyway, a design that blows up when power is cut because it cannot cool itself down to safe levels is... weird.
Re: Fukushima: Mark 1 Nuclear Reactor Design Caused GE Scientist To Quit In Protest
#6The title is technically correct; however, it seems like link bait once you get to page two of the article and see: "Bridenbaugh told ABC News that he believes the design flaws that prompted his resignation from GE were eventually addressed at the Fukushima Daiichi plant."
> he believes the design flaws that prompted his resignation from GE were eventually addressed Anyway, a design that blows up when power is cut because it cannot cool itself down to safe levels is... weird.
Dear downvoter, would you buy a car that falls apart (or blows up killing the passengers) when it runs out of gas?
If something can go wrong, it will, given time, go wrong. Even if there is one chance in a million for the whole chain of countermeasures to fail in tandem, give it a million chances to happen and you end up with a good chance of it happening.
Re: Fukushima: Mark 1 Nuclear Reactor Design Caused GE Scientist To Quit In Protest
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
> he believes the design flaws that prompted his resignation from GE were eventually addressed Anyway, a design that blows up when power is cut because it cannot cool itself down to safe levels is... weird.
Dear downvoter, would you buy a car that falls apart (or blows up killing the passengers) when it runs out of gas? If something can go wrong, it will, given time, go wrong. Even if there is one chance in a million for the whole chain of countermeasures to fail in tandem, give it a million chances to happen and you end up with a good chance of it happening.
There are part/system failures in cars that result in death, just as with nuclear reactors.
Re: Fukushima: Mark 1 Nuclear Reactor Design Caused GE Scientist To Quit In Protest
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
Dear downvoter, would you buy a car that falls apart (or blows up killing the passengers) when it runs out of gas? If something can go wrong, it will, given time, go wrong. Even if there is one chance in a million for the whole chain of countermeasures to fail in tandem, give it a million chances to happen and you end up with a good chance of it happening.
There are part/system failures in cars that result in death, just as with nuclear reactors.
They typically don't take out nearby villages as well, but point taken.
Re: Fukushima: Mark 1 Nuclear Reactor Design Caused GE Scientist To Quit In Protest
#9The title is technically correct; however, it seems like link bait once you get to page two of the article and see: "Bridenbaugh told ABC News that he believes the design flaws that prompted his resignation from GE were eventually addressed at the Fukushima Daiichi plant."
> he believes the design flaws that prompted his resignation from GE were eventually addressed Anyway, a design that blows up when power is cut because it cannot cool itself down to safe levels is... weird.
I agree with you -- actually go a step further and replace "weird" with "irresponsible" and that's how I feel about the whole situation.
There are newer generations of nuclear reactors that don't suffer from this design flaw, but convincing the public that nuclear power can be done safely is going to get a lot more difficult. This incident is going to be a huge step backwards for public acceptance of nuclear power.
Re: Fukushima: Mark 1 Nuclear Reactor Design Caused GE Scientist To Quit In Protest
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
> he believes the design flaws that prompted his resignation from GE were eventually addressed Anyway, a design that blows up when power is cut because it cannot cool itself down to safe levels is... weird.
Dear downvoter, would you buy a car that falls apart (or blows up killing the passengers) when it runs out of gas? If something can go wrong, it will, given time, go wrong. Even if there is one chance in a million for the whole chain of countermeasures to fail in tandem, give it a million chances to happen and you end up with a good chance of it happening.
There are some situations where risk may be acceptable.
Would I accept a car that blows up when it runs out of gas? No, but things like airplanes can, and have, killed passengers when they run out of gas. The risk of that happening is offset by the need to occasionally travel faster or farther than a car can take you.
I still think nuclear power is worth the risks of accidents, but I don't think that the proponents of nuclear power have been entirely honest about its safety.
Up until a week ago I was one of those people who would swear up and down that the technology is safe and would shut itself down in the event of an accident, and that all the previous incidents were due to human error anyway. No more. I actually feel stupid for believing that stuff now.