4 ms·

Chernobyl was a Gen II reactor. Three Mile Island and Fukushima were also Gen II. [0] There has never been a meltdown of a Gen III reactor, which is the bulk o

Chernobyl was a Gen II reactor. Three Mile Island and Fukushima were also Gen II. [0] There has never been a meltdown of a Gen III reactor, which is the bulk of the fleet in France. Gen IV are being designed to be impossible to melt down, and, to use waste from other plants as a fuel source. They do not emit radioactive waste.[1] [0] "To date, there have been five serious accidents (core damage) in the world since 1970 (one at Three Mile Island in 1979; one at Chernobyl in 1986; and three at Fukushima-Daiichi in 2011), corresponding to the beginning of the operation of generation II reactors. " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_plant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_plant [1] http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/nuclear-power-reactors/generation-iv-nuclear-reactors.aspx http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fue...

anoncake 7y ago
> There has never been a meltdown of a Gen III reactor yet. > Gen IV are being designed to be impossible to melt down Fukushima was designed to be tsunami-safe. Using NPPs risks rendering large areas uninhabitable. Using fossils risks most of Earth. That does make NPPs a better solution in the short term, but relying on them permanently is still madness.
- core-questions 7y ago
  > Fukushima was designed to be tsunami-safe. If you look at the compromises made in the design, I don't think you can really say that this was the case. Even if so, all it proves is that maybe we should build such reactors in safer places, not on fault lines near the ocean.
  - anoncake 7y ago
    The people who planned the Fukushima plant made some stupid mistakes. That proves that we shouldn't make stupid mistakes. But that's not possible. Yes, we can mostly avoid past mistakes. Until there is no accident for a while, people become complacent and start cutting costs. We cannot avoid the mistakes we have neither made yet nor thought of.
8bitsrule 7y ago
never been a meltdown of a Gen III reactor Gen IIIs seem to have a short and small operating history. That's helped their success rate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_III_reactor#Generation_III_reactors_currently_operational_or_under_construction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_III_reactor#Generat... Gen IV are being designed... What's the timeline for testing and commercialization of these better-sounding designs? We need tested, proven, and affordable large-scale solutions - now. As for France, they've managed to keep their problems very quiet for a long time, so ... how could we be sure? http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2017/ph241/dudzinski2/ http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2017/ph241/dudzinski2/ Putting safety concerns to one side, the many, many costs of nuclear are not getting lower.

anoncake 7y ago

> There has never been a meltdown of a Gen III reactor yet. > Gen IV are being designed to be impossible to melt down Fukushima was designed to be tsunami-safe. Using NPPs risks rendering large areas uninhabitable. Using fossils risks most of Earth. That does make NPPs a better solution in the short term, but relying on them permanently is still madness.

core-questions 7y ago
> Fukushima was designed to be tsunami-safe. If you look at the compromises made in the design, I don't think you can really say that this was the case. Even if so, all it proves is that maybe we should build such reactors in safer places, not on fault lines near the ocean.
- anoncake 7y ago
  The people who planned the Fukushima plant made some stupid mistakes. That proves that we shouldn't make stupid mistakes. But that's not possible. Yes, we can mostly avoid past mistakes. Until there is no accident for a while, people become complacent and start cutting costs. We cannot avoid the mistakes we have neither made yet nor thought of.

8bitsrule 7y ago

never been a meltdown of a Gen III reactor Gen IIIs seem to have a short and small operating history. That's helped their success rate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_III_reactor#Generation_III_reactors_currently_operational_or_under_construction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_III_reactor#Generat... Gen IV are being designed... What's the timeline for testing and commercialization of these better-sounding designs? We need tested, proven, and affordable large-scale solutions - now. As for France, they've managed to keep their problems very quiet for a long time, so ... how could we be sure? http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2017/ph241/dudzinski2/ http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2017/ph241/dudzinski2/ Putting safety concerns to one side, the many, many costs of nuclear are not getting lower.