Hmm...then I suppose you didn't see much coverage of local officials doing everything in their power to pave the way for the Shoreham plant. Their devotion to the thing bordered on religious fanaticism, even though, as I mentioned earlier, the evacuation plan was pure fantasy.
I wonder why those politicians were so gung-ho about it.
Actually, no. I don't wonder at all. I've been involved with local politics here for the past 15 years. I know exactly how things work.
Reasonable in terms of what? Bad people gaining access to the rods? That would be step #1, right? Is that the step you'd like to discuss first?
So, how do you manage to live from day to day? Every action you take is also dependent upon someone else whether it's getting on the train you're so fond of or an airplane or just crossing the street or even in opening a carton of milk.
Consider this -- there have been _ZERO_ (that's none, nada, not a one, nil, ...) deaths caused from a nuclear accident in a commercial nuclear facility in the US in the existence of the industry. That constitutes something on the order of 40 years times roughly 60 operating units or
2400 reactor-years of operation and not a single fatality(*).That's a good demonstration that taking care and fail-safe design techniques work. There are folks (I happened to have an adjacent office to one for about 15 years) who continually take every incident at every operating facility and analyze it for root cause(s) and evaluate what, if anything, went wrong and how to modify or upgrade procedures and/or equipment or training to ensure it doesn't occur elsewhere and that other utility operators of similar facilities are made aware of how to deal with it were it to occur at one of their facilities as well.
The difference in the nuclear utility operations as opposed to the kind of daily "run of the mill" accidents you're aware of is that the level of design of the facilities for safety and the backup systems and training in place in the event of operational failures are at a far higher level of redundancy and contingent planning than virtually any other industry. While the level of QA and QC and inspection, etc., in the civilian aviation business is of similar level, there isn't a backup parachute for everybody to bail. So, while remarkably safe overall, airplanes do crash on occasion at a level of risk society in general considers acceptable although regrettable when it does.
(*) There have been, of course, some industrial accidents where there have been serious injuries and fatalities from falls or other industrial causes, but none in which the nuclear characteristic of the facility had anything to do with the accident. The nuclear safety itself that folks are so inherently afraid of owing to the initial exposure by way of WWII and the incessant drumming of the anti-nukes' propaganda continuing to tie commercial power to weapons is simply not justified by the facts.
--
No, that wasn't the point -- for the type of thing you were proposing there's no indication they have had any significant effect on the mass behavior of the population...
--
Remember the World Trade Center? There's always a way.
Do you just make this up to fell better?
The recycling center in our area actually runs without any tax subsidies because it is run on a really sensible local level.
We must've parted ways. I'm focused on the idea that PSAs shouldn't be utilized because someone gets rich making them. Based on that kind of stupid logic, nuclear power plants shouldn't have security guards because they get paid a salary.
JoeSpareBedroom wrote: ...
And completely unneeded but an NRC operational licensing requirement.
Because it was a benefit to the city and surroundings.
--
No, I don't really want to discuss any of it. These scenarios have been reviewed over and over.
What do you think a typical PWR fuel assembly weighs...
--
WTC didn't have a containment that would shed an airliner.
--
Tell me your cynical reason why an evac plan is a requirement.
Not according to the citizens who paid the salaries of those politicians.
I don't know. How much?
Nobody expected an airliner.
Already did in earlier response.
I suspect that wasn't universal, either. I'm quite sure there were a number of taxpayers who either didn't care or were supportive as well as those against. In fact, I would suspect in reality that the "didn't cares" far outnumbered either of the other two factions and that inaction of that large group allowed the agitation of the anti-s to be far more influential than their numbers would otherwise be. That's the typical scenario in almost all of these types of battles.
--
I asked first...I would like to get a feel for what you think you know about what you think could be done by a little band of uglies...
You get a bunch of guys together and work up a plan for your scenario and how to pull it off successfully and then we can talk.
--
...
For nukes they have -- and much else, most of which is restricted data simply to add security to the security plans themselves (iow, if I told you everything I knew, I'd have to shoot you :) ).
--
You must have a rather menial job if you think you've already imagined everything that's possible.
The oldest nukes expected an airliner as part of their design?
Yes.
--
I guess we have nothing to worry about, then. All eventualities have been compensated for. I feel much better.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required