3 ms·
It gives data about reactors that are, as I recall, 40 years old. That's entirely irrelevant to the designs of newer reactors.
by sorbus 16y ago
It gives data about reactors that are, as I recall, 40 years old. That's entirely irrelevant to the designs of newer reactors.
- jshen 16y agonot if the new reactors made the same assumptions. Are you suggesting that it isn't possible, or highly unlikely, that we'll learn anything worthwhile to improve reactor design in the future from this disaster?
- sorbus 16y agoYeah, more or less. We're learning more about what happens when it fails, but it's an old reactor, and we've seen them fail before. We also seem quite unlikely to learn anything especially revolutionary about how radioactive materials behave.
- jshen 16y ago"We also seem quite unlikely to learn anything especially revolutionary about how radioactive materials behave." But that's not what we need to learn about. We need to learn about how the systems that are supposed to contain radioactive materials stand up to major catastrophe.
- Tichy 16y agoI am pretty sure people in Japan had nevertheless been told those reactors are safe. They will be told new reactors are safe. Why should they believe it now? If you don't count it as a data point about safety of reactors, count it as a data point about the reliability of engineers and governments.