Let's Hear It For Engineers And Science

osusev

How about we all focus on the human problem, not a position.

donate to the Redcross: http://bit.ly/7ZgYpM

VaporTrail

Cheers. I hope everyone else donates. I would, but I have 50 dollars to my name and need to eat.

Mr. T

@osusev said:

donate to the Redcross: http://bit.ly/7ZgYpM

I allready donated the other day.

More info on whats going on below.

Watch the whole thing. There are a few problems folks are overlooking.

heckofajobbrownie

Speaking of science, here's some Vapor bait:

"The National Center for Science Education has tracked a record-setting number of nine anti-evolution bills introduced in state legislatures since Jan. 1."

VaporTrail

slowburn

Let's talk fallout ramifications next spring when two headed cows, 7 legged lambs and other genetic mutants appear. Study the stats showing incidents of

mental Retardation and thyroid cancer amongst youngsters this time next year. Let the talking heads spin it all they want . The proof will be in the toxic sludge pudding.

calfoxwc

Offhand, I wonder why it isn't considered a bad design, for the Japanese nuclear plants to have their

generators and pumps located low enough to be swamped, and stop working, which caused the

rods to overheat.

I mean, from a goofy layman's point of view, why not have them located well up high, since tsunami's aren't unhead of?

NOTE: We keep going to GOOGLE EARTH, and we watch the occurence of earthquakes. The red dots are those that have occured

in the last five minutes. It's unbelievble - and you can scan all over the world.

calfoxwc

Hmmm.

Obamao's surgeon general says it would be a good idea to get iodine tablets as a precaution...

on the U.S. west coast.

Yep.

http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Surgeon-General-Buying-Iodine-Appropriate-118031559.html

heckofajobbrownie

One more for you, Vapor:

"Thirty-one Republicans on the House Energy And Commerce Committee -- the entire Republican contingent on the panel -- declined on Tuesday to vote in support of the very idea that climate change exists."

DieHardBrownsFan

@calfoxwc said:

Hmmm.

Obamao's surgeon general says it would be a good idea to get iodine tablets as a precaution...

on the U.S. west coast.

Yep.

http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Surgeon-General-Buying-Iodine-Appropriate-118031559.html

I just saw the Professor of Harvard Medical School Nuclear program say there is no need to take iodine tablets. The amount of radiation that will get to the USA is way to small to worry about. Iodine tablets fill the thyroid with iodine and prevent radioactive iodine from going in. This makes the body eliminate the radioactive iodine. It does not help with other types of radiation. Another person speaking out there ass.

DieHardBrownsFan

@calfoxwc said:

Offhand, I wonder why it isn't considered a bad design, for the Japanese nuclear plants to have their

generators and pumps located low enough to be swamped, and stop working, which caused the

rods to overheat.

I mean, from a goofy layman's point of view, why not have them located well up high, since tsunami's aren't unhead of?

NOTE: We keep going to GOOGLE EARTH, and we watch the occurence of earthquakes. The red dots are those that have occured

in the last five minutes. It's unbelievble - and you can scan all over the world.

You do realize that the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Plant is directly on the shore of the Pacific Ocean? It was swamped by a massive 9.0 earthquake and a 30+ foot tsunami. Use your brain.

Mr. T

@diehardbrownsfan said:

I just saw the Professor of Harvard Medical School Nuclear program say there is no need to take iodine tablets. The amount of radiation that will get to the USA is way to small to worry about. Iodine tablets fill the thyroid with iodine and prevent radioactive iodine from going in. This makes the body eliminate the radioactive iodine. It does not help with other types of radiation. Another person speaking out there ass.

Is that the same guy who said there were not any deaths, injuries or any offspring that were mutated from the Chernobyl disaster?

That guy is a liar.

by the way the 4th reactor is completly destroyed, that is the one that housed the spent fuel rods.

calfoxwc

You do realize that the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Plant is directly on the shore of the Pacific Ocean? It was swamped by a massive 9.0 earthquake and a 30+ foot tsunami. Use your brain DIEHARD

***********************

I was. You use yours. You're inferring, that engineers, who can build a NUCLEAR ENERGY SITE, on the PACIFIC OCEAN, with the shoreline not far from a gigantic fault line,

couldn't figure out that the generators and pumps may have to be put UP on a flatform higher than 30 feet?

It wasn't mile high, DH, it was 30'. The generators and pumps were damaged, and that is why they had to have workers try to keep pumping water, but the workers

had to leave the one plant. Now, they (we?) are using helicopters to drop water on it. And, our Navy is being ordered to stay FIFTY MILES AWAY, because of the

danger of a meltdown. Come on, man.

DieHardBrownsFan

@calfoxwc said:

You do realize that the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Plant is directly on the shore of the Pacific Ocean? It was swamped by a massive 9.0 earthquake and a 30+ foot tsunami. Use your brain CAL.

***********************

I was. You use yours. You're inferring, that engineers, who can build a NUCLEAR ENERGY SITE, on the PACIFIC OCEAN, with the shoreline not far from a gigantic fault line,

couldn't figure out that the generators and pumps may have to be put UP on a flatform higher than 30 feet?

It wasn't mile high, DH, it was 30'. The generators and pumps were damaged, and that is why they had to have workers try to keep pumping water, but the workers

had to leave the one plant. Now, they (we?) are using helicopters to drop water on it. And, our Navy is being ordered to stay FIFTY MILES AWAY, because of the

danger of a meltdown. Come on, man.

No Nuclear reactor has been through this kind of earthquake or Tsunami, let alone both at the same time. Putting up the generators on a platform? WTF are you talking about. The tsunami ripped buildings down and swept them miles away. It brought ships inland for miles. And you think building the generators and pumps ON A PLATFORM is a good idea? I think the engineers have a bit more experience then you. You don't realize the power of a tsunami, it is not just a "wave" it is the entire ocean coming in like Niagra Falls and nothing can stop it. Japan is an Island that has many earthquakes, I lived there for years and experience probably dozens of them. This could just as easily happen in California or elsewhere. There is no way to plan for it. And the USN is not dropping water, it is the Japanese.

slowburn

There is mass of 38 milliom civilians 100 miles to the south of the xxxxed up reactors. A strong southerly gale can quickly migrate much of the airborne nasties

down to the Tokyo megaplex in a few hours. Lets see how the massess hold up to the ingested particles that turn their insides to jelly. Talk about anarchy

and a complete breakdown of civility.. The perfect storm of life changing radiation fallout is upon us.

Entomb the defective reactors with sand, concrete and whatever else the ruskies did to plug their mess of chornobly(SP)

Not one nuclear reactor power plant has been constructed in conus USa since the break down/melt down at Three Mile Island 1978???

calfoxwc

DH - you are way wrong on this one.

Simple fact is, the towers were not swept away. A concrete tower about fifty feet high, could easily have saved those

generators and pumps.

Those gens and pumps... are absolutely CRUCIAL. Why NOT build a simple concrete building, with a platform high enough,

to have those generators and pumps be free of danger? WTF are you talking about?

We aren't talking about an entrance to a bathroom. We're talking the FREAKIN COOLING SYSTEM that

is SUPPOSED TO NOT BE DAMAGED SO IT CAN KEEP THE RODS COOL. I don't know how tall the cooling towers are,

but I'll bet you they are about one hundred times higher than thirty freakin feet. Come on, get real here.

DieHardBrownsFan

@calfoxwc said:

DH - you are way wrong on this one.

Simple fact is, the towers were not swept away. A concrete tower about fifty feet high, could easily have saved those

generators and pumps.

Those gens and pumps... are absolutely CRUCIAL. Why NOT build a simple concrete building, with a platform high enough,

to have those generators and pumps be free of danger? WTF are you talking about?

We aren't talking about an entrance to a bathroom. We're talking the FREAKIN COOLING SYSTEM that

is SUPPOSED TO NOT BE DAMAGED SO IT CAN KEEP THE RODS COOL. I don't know how tall the cooling towers are,

but I'll bet you they are about one hundred times higher than thirty freakin feet. Come on, get real here.

One thing mz the pussy the pussy was right about, you are a frigging moron.

VaporTrail

Hmm... I actually have to side with Cal (seriously?). As an engineer, you need to build for your worst-case scenario.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historic_tsunamis

Look at how many of these are in Japan, and how many they killed before it became super populated and had nuclear plants. They probably should've planned for this. I guarantee that no more nuclear plants are built there until they come up with a new design. I'd guess it'd have to be some sort of pyramidal design where you cut off the top (a frustum). That's the only shape I'd consider stable enough to elevate a nuclear reactor and its cooling supply. It would be much more expensive and require a pretty large amount of raw materials, but I suppose it'd be less expensive than what's currently going on.

Also, reports of 50-200 volunteers are staying at the plant to try and get shit fixed. They're getting as much radiation in an hour that most workers of that type get in a lifetime.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/japan-tsunami/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503051&objectid=10712802

God damn. They're like our firefighters on 9/11. These guys are pretty much accepting the fact that they're gonna have a slow, miserable end to save their country from it.

Pumpkin Eater

@calfoxwc said:

Hmmm.

Obamao's surgeon general says it would be a good idea to get iodine tablets as a precaution...

on the U.S. west coast.

Yep.

http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Surgeon-General-Buying-Iodine-Appropriate-118031559.html

You'll probably be exposed to more radiation in Grand Central Station in New York than radiation from Japan's Nuclear facilities.

DieHardBrownsFan

@vaportrail said:

Hmm... I actually have to side with Cal (seriously?). As an engineer, you need to build for your worst-case scenario.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historic_tsunamis

Look at how many of these are in Japan, and how many they killed before it became super populated and had nuclear plants. They probably should've planned for this. I guarantee that no more nuclear plants are built there until they come up with a new design. I'd guess it'd have to be some sort of pyramidal design where you cut off the top (a frustum). That's the only shape I'd consider stable enough to elevate a nuclear reactor and its cooling supply. It would be much more expensive and require a pretty large amount of raw materials, but I suppose it'd be less expensive than what's currently going on.

Also, reports of 50-200 volunteers are staying at the plant to try and get shit fixed. They're getting as much radiation in an hour that most workers of that type get in a lifetime.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/japan-tsunami/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503051&objectid=10712802

God damn. They're like our firefighters on 9/11. These guys are pretty much accepting the fact that they're gonna have a slow, miserable end to save their country from it.

This plant was built in 1971.

The General Electric-designed nuclear reactors involved in the Japanese emergency are very similar to 23 reactors in use in the United States, according to Nuclear Regulatory Commission records.

The NRC database of nuclear power plants shows that 23 of the 104 nuclear plants in the U.S. are GE boiling-water reactors with GE's Mark I systems for containing radioactivity, the same containment system used by the reactors in trouble at the Fukushima Dai-ichi plant. The U.S. reactors are in Alabama, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Vermont.

In addition, 12 reactors in the U.S. have the later Mark II or Mark III containment system from GE. These 12 are in Illinois, Louisiana, Mississippi, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Washington state. See the full list below.

GE via NRC

GE's Mark I containment system.

Msnbc.com sent questions Saturday to GE, asking whether the Japanese reactors differed from those of the same general design used in the U.S.

A GE spokesman, Michael Tetuan, referred all questions to the Nuclear Energy Institute, an industry trade and lobbying group. Tetuan said GE nuclear staff members in Wilmington, N.C., are focused on assisting GE employees in Japan and standing by to help the Japanese authorities if asked to help. The NEI on Sunday confirmed that the figure of 23 is correct.

Update: On Monday, GE Hitachi Nuclear sent the following statement, in full: "The BWR Mark 1 reactor is the industry’s workhorse with a proven track record of safety and reliability for more than 40 years. Today, there are 32 BWR Mark 1 reactors operating as designed worldwide. There has never been a breach of a Mark 1 containment system."

The six reactors at the Fukushima Dai-ichi power plant, which had explosions on Saturday and Monday, are all GE-designed boiling-water reactors, known in the industry as BWRs. Five have containment systems of GE's Mark I design, and the sixth is of the Mark II type. They were placed in operation between 1971 and 1979.

A fact sheet from the anti-nuclear advocacy group Nuclear Information and Resource Service contends that the Mark I design has design problems, and that in 1972 an Atomic Energy Commission member, Dr. Stephen Hanuaer, recommended that this type of system be discontinued.

"Some modifications have been made to U.S. Mark I reactors since 1986, although the fundamental design deficiencies remain," NIRS said. The group has a commentary online describing what it says are hazards of boiling-water reactors: human invervention needed to vent radioactive steam in the case of a core meltdown, and problems with aging.

Since the earthquake struck Japan on Friday, the early statements by the industry's Nuclear Industry Institute have emphasized that only six plants in the U.S. have precisely the same generation of reactor design (GE boiling-water reactor model 3) as the first reactor to have trouble in Fukushima Daiichi. Problems then developed at different reactors of GE model 4.

But aside from the generation of reactor design, the following 23 U.S. plants have GE boiling-water reactors (GE models 2, 3 or 4) with the same Mark I containment design used at Fukushima, according to the NRC's online database:

• Browns Ferry 1, Athens, Alabama, operating license since 1973, reactor type GE 4.

• Browns Ferry 2, Athens, Alabama, 1974, GE 4.

• Browns Ferry 3, Athens, Alabama, 1976, GE 4.

• Brunswick 1, Southport, North Carolina, 1976, GE 4.

• Brunswick 2, Southport, North Carolina, 1974, GE 4.

• Cooper, Brownville, Nebraska, 1974, GE 4.

• Dresden 2, Morris, Illinois, 1970, GE 3.

• Dresden 3, Morris, Illinois, 1971, GE 3.

• Duane Arnold, Palo, Iowa, 1974, GE 4.

• Fermi 2, Monroe, Michigan, 1985, GE 4.

• FitzPatrick, Scriba, New York, 1974, GE 4.

• Hatch 1, Baxley, Georgia, 1974, GE 4.

• Hatch 2, Baxley, Georgia, 1978, GE 4.

• Hope Creek, Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey, 1986, GE 4.

• Monticello, Monticello, Minnesota, 1970, GE 3.

• Nine Mile Point 1, Scriba, New York, 1969, GE 2.

• Oyster Creek, Forked River, New Jersey, 1969, GE 2.

• Peach Bottom 2, Delta, Pennsylvania, 1973, GE 4.

• Peach Bottom 3, Delta, Pennsylvania, 1974, GE 4.

• Pilgrim, Plymouth, Massachusetts, 1972, GE 3.

• Quad Cities 1, Cordova, Illinois, 1972, GE 3.

• Quad Cities 2, Moline, Illinois, 1972, GE 3.

• Vermont Yankee, Vernon, Vermont, 1972, GE 4.

And these 12 newer GE boiling-water reactors have a Mark II or Mark III design:

• Clinton, Clinton, Illinois, 1987, GE 6, Mark III.

• Columbia Generating Station, Richland, Washington, 1984, GE 5, Mark II.

• Grand Gulf, Port Gibson, Mississippi, 1984, GE 6, Mark III.

• LaSalle 1, Marseilles, Illinois, 1982, GE 5, Mark II.

• LaSalle 2, Marseilles, Illinois, 1983, GE 5, Mark II.

• Limerick 1, Limerick, Pennsylvania, 1985, GE 4, Mark II.

• Limerick 2, Limerick, Pennsylvania, 1989, GE 4, Mark II.

• Nine Mile Point 2, Scriba, New York, 1987, GE 5, Mark II.

• Perry, Perry, Ohio, 1986, GE 6, Mark III.

• River Bend, St. Francisville, Louisiana, 1985, GE 6, Mark III.

• Susquehanna 1, Salem Township, Pennsylvania, 1982, GE 4, Mark II.

• Susquehanna 2, Salem Township, Pennsylvania, 1984, GE 4, Mark II.

Other resources:

Details on each U.S. reactor are in the NRC list.

The NRC has an explainer on boiling-water reactors and the various GE containment designs.

Here's an earthquake hazard map of the lower 48 United States from the U.S. Geological Survey showing the areas with the greatest risks.