3 ms·
What is difficult to reconcile is that we all know that nuclear meltdowns are catastrophic events, that the resultant fallout/radioactive contamination is utter
by phlux 16y ago
What is difficult to reconcile is that we all know that nuclear meltdowns are catastrophic events, that the resultant fallout/radioactive contamination is utterly horrible.
Yet it seems that we dont build reactors with the types of failsafe systems that truly are needed should meltdown occur.
Obviously this reactor is old, and was not built during a time when we really knew what a meltdown looked like in real life. After Chernobyl, and now Fukishima, I think we really really really need to look at what the failsafe systems, containment, backup cooling and other system requirements really need to be.
Should we build reactors only in D.U.M.B. like facilities? Should we build them in old open-pit mines, such that they could be entombed properly.
Have we put enough research into containment facilities such that their structures will not melt?
I know that these faciliies have multiple backups, but clearly even then we can have situations where they dont work. Yes, this was a trifecta of incredibly fantastic circumstance, but it still happened and we are now dealing with a shitstorm.
Watching the documentary last night about how the earthquake dropped the coastline of japan upto 1 meter in elevation resulting in the sea-walls being 1 meter less than the tsunami - and the fact that clearly we know that tsunamis would occur there - placing a 6 reactor facility ON THE COAST LINE seems pretty damn stupid at this point.
It's like "Nuclear energy is the safest energy there is, until its not!"
I am all for nuclear -- but its current incarnation is rife with the traditional corrupt bullshit that plagues all other human endeavors; politics.
Why do we not have a global energy task force whose singular job it is is to plan, produce and protect the worlds energy?
If we had an organization whose sole charter was to produce energy, and was funded based on the economies of all the worlds countries - and energy was metered out to all countries in a responsible way -- we could be much further along to becoming a unified space-faring race....
/rant
- philwelch 16y agoWhy do we not have a global energy task force whose singular job it is is to plan, produce and protect the worlds energy? Large parts of the world actually tried this, not just for their energy needs but for all other goods and services, too. It doesn't actually work that way in reality.
- phlux 16y agoI understand. However - I am curious - energy is the fundamental resource we now are 100% dependent upon for survival. Obviously the energy industry knows this , thus the fact that they have successfully staged a coup on global politics. I do find it interesting though, that there is not really any apolitical/civilian organizations that seek to guide/set/create global energy policy. I mean real apolitical orgs - not a shill think-tank such as CFR BS. God I'm getting cynical.
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]