Re: Fukishima
 

They also don't tell us about a volcanoe in Southern Japan that has erupted, or of the nuclear facility at Onagawa as it prepared for a meltdown after the earthquake and Tsunami.

Re: Fukishima
 

The problems are politics and enviromental and a good dose of stupidity.

You cant build new reactors coz the tree huggers wont let you...which are safer...
So instead you keep old reactors...which are less safe...working well past their bedtime and then wonder why when they go pop.

You have to wonder the logic of building reactors in a earthquake zone as powerful as Japan. If they can survive or work safely in extremes then fine...but any kind of risk and then you cant.

Japan has very few energy resources so the nuclear option seemed ok...but I bet it is less ok now than a week ago.

Re: Fukishima
 

I'll bet it isn't. What choice do they have? They have no natural resources to speak of so if they have any scense they will continue building them. The new GEN IV reactors are safer and hell... if a 1960s built reactor can withstand an R9 quake followed by one of the most horrendous Tsunamis known in living history without going BANG the way Chernobyl did then I say that makes them a pretty good bet for Japan... especially a this is a once in a 1000 year event.

Re: Fukishima
 

It's just for a photoshoot
http://www.aviastar.org/foto/gallery/mil/mi-26_15.jpg

Re: Fukishima
 

Who here has a degree in nuclear physics?

Re: Fukishima
 

not me

however the sea water has debris from 10000 houses in it.. if that doesn't fk up pumps what will..?

Re: Fukishima
 

I'm guessing nobody, but I'm guessing there are a few engineers around the place and judging by the response to the UK energy thread quite a few people with an interest.
But come to think of it there are a few ex rum and sodomy types on here, some of them must know a bit about nuclear stuff.
Then again the last I remember about that was being inconvenienced at the Spanish border as a kid because of some leaky tube full of seamen floating in the harbour. Probably better the uninformed opinions ;)

The presence of a human factor shouldn't put people off discussing things, and if every non-expert kept out of these discussions all we'd have is the official view.

Re: Fukishima
 

Remember that 99.9% of the voting public whom supposedly decide on whether nuclear power is a good thing or not are not qualified to make that choice. That is the glory of a democracy. Discussion on these types of topic, qualified or not, is healthy.

Re: Fukishima
 

If you say so:D

Re: Fukishima
 

Indeed I do sir:)