Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Germany shuts down seven reactors‎ because of Fokushima

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 141 posts

Re: Germany shuts down seven reactors‎ because of Fokushima

#91

Post by bhousel »

bdonlan wrote: post #84
bhousel wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The loss of power is actually one of the aspects of the situation that I find especially tragic. The USS Ronald Reagan is only 100 miles offshore and has its own nuclear power plant that could be tied into the local grid to provide emergency power to things like the water treatment plants, hospitals, and even the cooling system at the Fukushima Dai-ichi facility. I know the details of parking an aircraft carrier outs…

The problem would be that of matching frequency and phase with the mainland grid. The Kantou, Touhoku, and Hokkaidou area grids run at 50hz, unlike the North American standard of 60hz - so if the ship is using 60hz they'd have to convert to DC and back to AC; this conversion equipment may not be easily available immediately. Even if the frequency matches, you'd need to match phase with the grid as a whole (or intenti…

Yeah, it's no small task, but definitely possible. Japan's electrical grid actually operates at both 50hz some places and 60hz in other places, so it's likely that they have the equipment somewhere that could be flown in by helicopter to make it happen.

The electrical engineer in me is fascinated by this stuff, so I submitted a new topic. Maybe people more knowledgeable will comment: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2327908

Re: Germany shuts down seven reactors‎ because of Fokushima

#93

Post by bdonlan »

bhousel wrote: post #91
bdonlan wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem would be that of matching frequency and phase with the mainland grid. The Kantou, Touhoku, and Hokkaidou area grids run at 50hz, unlike the North American standard of 60hz - so if the ship is using 60hz they'd have to convert to DC and back to AC; this conversion equipment may not be easily available immediately. Even if the frequency matches, you'd need to match phase with the grid as a whole (or intenti…

Yeah, it's no small task, but definitely possible. Japan's electrical grid actually operates at both 50hz some places and 60hz in other places, so it's likely that they have the equipment somewhere that could be flown in by helicopter to make it happen. The electrical engineer in me is fascinated by this stuff, so I submitted a new topic. Maybe people more knowledgeable will comment: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?…

They do indeed have some conversion stations, but these stations are already working at full capacity trying to support the kantou area grid (which is having rolling blackouts due to power plant shutdowns). They're also probably not very portable.

Re: Germany shuts down seven reactors‎ because of Fokushima

#94

Post by nopassrecover »

wladimir wrote: post #89
nopassrecover wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's because you're mind is clouded by the effects of a mental fallacy (the availability heuristic to be precise) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Availability_heuristic

You have the full right to disagree with me; I voiced my post as my personal opinion. But you're very rude to say my mind is clouded. I simply don't like large downside risks.

It's not a personal attack and now you're using a strawman argument to deflect my response (I'm not saying you don't have a right to voice a personal opinion, simply that you aren't looking at this objectively). If you read the link I posted you'll see that what you think is a "large downside risk" only seems that way because of a perception fallacy - we believe incidents like nuclear explosions and airplane crashes are much riskier than everyday risks like lung cancer deaths and car accidents.

Re: Germany shuts down seven reactors‎ because of Fokushima

#95

Post by mortenjorck »

lutorm wrote: post #85
mortenjorck wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real tragedy here is that while it's almost certain no civilians will die from radiation poisoning in this case, there quite likely will be or have already been deaths stemming from lack of electrical power. But people dying from illness from lack of clean water because their water treatment plant is offline and their hospital is out of emergency power doesn't get TV ratings, pageviews, and political attention li…

No, the real tragedy is the now estimated >10,000 people dead from the tsunami and earthquake itself. That said, I don't get your point. It's not like they could run the reactors if they wanted to. Those people you are talking about are dying because a natural disaster took out the entire infrastructure. That's totally independent of what's going on at the nuclear plants. Besides, by what knowledge are you claiming t…

Yes, certainly the initial loss of life is the worst part of this. But there are still many more lives at risk, and not from radiation.

The radiation most civilians see from a BWR steam release will be measured in microsieverts -- one CT scan equals thousands of those. The cleanup workers are going to be at higher risk, but I think it's safe to say none of them will die from the doses they are receiving. Ultimately, the danger from radiation in this case is vastly outweighed by the other dangers associated with a flooded area with no power, and that's what is so unfortunate about the media coverage about Fukushima; it's overshadowing the real ongoing danger to human lives.

Re: Germany shuts down seven reactors‎ because of Fokushima

#96

Post by bhousel »

thematt wrote: post #19
bhousel wrote: post #9

This strikes me more as a political stunt by Merkel to rally the conservative base in Germany than anything else. Still, it doesn't surprise me that this is such a hot button issue right now. I've long been a supporter of nuclear power, but the events of the past week have made me start to reconsider a lot of my beliefs about its safety.

Why? I actually think the events of the past week prove it's safety. Let put it in perspective: a 40 year old nuclear reactor gets hit by a 9 magnitude earthquake, then slammed with 20 ft. tall swell of water, followed by an explosion due to the buildup of hydrogen gas that blows off the roof of the building, and after all that the core was still mostly intact and contained. That seems like an amazingly positive resu…

It's not a technology problem, it's a people problem.

The technology works incredibly well. And in Japan, the people are well trained and prepared, and I have every confidence that they'll be able to cool the reactors down without releasing much radiation into the environment, as long as nothing else goes wrong.

Now take that exact same reactor and build it in Iran, Bangladesh, Congo, Libya. Do you have the same confidence in it? Japan was a best-case scenario.

Re: Germany shuts down seven reactors‎ because of Fokushima

#97

Post by mironathetin »

bhousel wrote: post #69
jgrahamc wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which beliefs? That a nuclear power station situated in a major earthquake zone next to the coast could magically survive a 9.0 earthquake and a tsunami? Right now, we don't know how serious this situation is, it could be that this will end with a small amount of radiation leaked and four reactors that have to be decommissioned. Or it could end with a major environmental disaster. We simply don't know yet. I'd cautio…

I've done a ridiculous amount of reading the past few days, and I still believe that nuclear power is probably the best source of power that we have available to us. But I didn't realize that keeping a reactor vessel (and fuel storage pools) cool after the reactor has been scrammed is such a challenge. I also didn't know that hydrogen explosions are a normal byproduct of cooling down a reactor core. Yes, I know that…

"I've done a ridiculous amount of reading the past few days, and I still believe that nuclear power is probably the best source of power that we have available to us."

The best source of power that we have is to use energy more efficiently.

Re: Germany shuts down seven reactors‎ because of Fokushima

#98

Post by scott_s »

mortenjorck wrote: post #95
lutorm wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the real tragedy is the now estimated >10,000 people dead from the tsunami and earthquake itself. That said, I don't get your point. It's not like they could run the reactors if they wanted to. Those people you are talking about are dying because a natural disaster took out the entire infrastructure. That's totally independent of what's going on at the nuclear plants. Besides, by what knowledge are you claiming t…

Yes, certainly the initial loss of life is the worst part of this. But there are still many more lives at risk, and not from radiation. The radiation most civilians see from a BWR steam release will be measured in microsieverts -- one CT scan equals thousands of those. The cleanup workers are going to be at higher risk, but I think it's safe to say none of them will die from the doses they are receiving. Ultimately,…

As we can see in this discussion, what happens at Fukushima may impact nuclear policy throughout the globe.

Re: Germany shuts down seven reactors‎ because of Fokushima

#100

Post by ckuehne »

ErrantX wrote: post #90
xlpz wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never said it'd easy, or that it wouldn't cost money. Everything costs money. Nuclear power plants are expensive, and they have vast hidden costs that are offset to society (how much will it cost to Japan to clean up this mess? is this added to the cost?). Many countries are already getting a very significant percentage of their energy from renewable sources, things like solar power or wind power are getting more e…

I disagree as it happens, I think it is actually not all that hard to make a major impact without getting serious govt. funding (which sadly is like squeezing blood from a stone). All it requires is for those people with enough funds to go out and buy solar panels for their roofs. Even my parents, who are not exactly the most well off people, can afford (and have bought) solar panels. It doesn't make them self suffic…

"but if everyone in the town (that could) did it that is a massive impact!"

No, it is not: http://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/withouthotair/c6/page_39....

Post reply on HN