5 ms·
They don't have to answer to their citizens if things go awry. Plenty of opportunity for cost cutting.
by purple_ducks 7y ago
They don't have to answer to their citizens if things go awry.
Plenty of opportunity for cost cutting.
- makomk 7y agoYeah, it's worth remembering that Russia still operates RBMK nuclear reactors and plans to do so for as long as they can keep them working. The safety levels of their nuclear power program do not exactly match Western standards to put it lightly.
- CaptainMarvel 7y agoContext: The RBMK reactor had a serious flaw which resulted in Chernobyl. Source: the recent TV show of the same name.
- The_rationalist 7y ago"The RBMK reactor had a serious flaw" The serious flaw was multiple consecutive human errors which could today be prevented by software checklist enforcement.
- Jedd 7y ago> "The RBMK reactor had a serious flaw" The serious flaw was multiple consecutive human errors which could today be prevented by software checklist enforcement. This is incorrect. The serious design flaw was that the 'stop the reactor reacting' button rapidly accelerated the reaction briefly, but long enough to cause a massive spike. There were also human errors on the operations side.
- littlestymaar 7y agoThere were indeed design flaws (some of which are mitigated now that they changed the enrichment level of the fuel used in the reactor). But Chernobyl cannot be described as «a design problem and also human errors». Anatoli Diatlov gave INSANE orders that led to the catastrophe. With such a culture were an all powerful chief can send his technicians to gulag if they dare disobeying an accident like this could have happened even with the safest PWR.
- acidburnNSA 7y agoThis is kind of crazy to say, but after the obvious flaws were fixed, RBMKs are pretty solid, efficient machines.