24 ms·
I read what you wrote in the linked post, and your view of the situation appears to be... erm... too bright if you will. Were there not repeated cooling syste
by huhtenberg 16y ago
I read what you wrote in the linked post, and your view of the situation appears to be... erm... too bright if you will.
Were there not repeated cooling system failure resulting cooling pumps running on batteries (that needed to be swapped every few hours)? This sounds to me less like "something working as designed" and more like scraping last fallback options. Releasing (lightly radioactive) steam to ease the pressure in a chamber they have no view or control over doesn't sound that much better either. Nor does the evacuation of 140,000 people "from the area around Fukushima".
All in all, based on the quotes of Japanese authorities that sip into the Reuters' feed - they did not have a situation under full control at several points. They handled it as professional as it's possible, no doubts about it, but it could've unfolded differently.
- anonymous246 16y agohttps://morgsatlarge.wordpress.com/2011/03/13/why-i-am-not-worried-about-japans-nuclear-reactors/ https://morgsatlarge.wordpress.com/2011/03/13/why-i-am-not-w...
- epochwolf 16y agoWorst possible case right now is a meltdown in the core (which is not explosive, just hot thermally and radioactively). A meltdown is not a problem because containment vessel is still intact and it's designed to handle a meltdown. It's just expensive and a bit dangerous to clean up radioactive sludge off the bottom of the containment vessel. (The building that blew off just protected the containment vessel from weather.) The article linked by anonymous246 explains in detail.