4 ms·
It's a people problem. People are fallible on the best days, assuming everyone did their very best from nuclear physicists to construction workers, mistakes ar
by ses1984 6y ago
It's a people problem.
People are fallible on the best days, assuming everyone did their very best from nuclear physicists to construction workers, mistakes are made. You take steps to reduce the risk. Research gets review. Engineering schematics get review. Construction gets inspection. Still some mistakes will get through.
And people always act their very best all the time right?
You can even have a perfect design, perfect construction, that is mismanaged years after it's built, after the original engineers and bureaucrats lose control.
The same people problems apply to basically every human endeavor, but nuclear's capability to cause accidents that have a lasting impact is pretty scary. You don't feel even a twinge of existential dread when you think about? If you don't, then I don't think I want you working on a reactor.
- markvdb 6y agoThis. Humans are spectacularly bad at this kind of scale in time/project budget/size...
- IgorPartola 6y agoWe are scary good at it actually. For example check out this and think about the architects who started vs those who finished it: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florence_Cathedral https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florence_Cathedral
- ses1984 6y agoI was actually going to reply with something similar, but I don't think this stacks up to the damage that can be unleashed in a nuclear accident. Building this took a few lifetimes. Nuclear accidents can have effects that are orders of magnitude larger and longer.
- riffraff 6y agoI am not sure something built by the catholic church, one of few institutions that lasted for the last 2k years, is the perfect example. Unless we plan on getting the pope to build nuclear power plants, which does sound cool.
- ClumsyPilot 6y agoA sufficiently large pool can be built, that any plausible leak will take many days. Think about it: a million liters of water take a long time to dissapear, after all lakes stay there for a long time without rainfall. Weve built many many ponds, it's not hard.
- ses1984 6y agoI'm not sure it's that simple.
- p1mrx 6y agoIt's literally a big hole with water in it; what are you unsure about?
- michaelt 6y agoOur largest manmade lakes are created by dams, and you can find plenty of example of dams failing in ways that don't take many days. If our smallest manmade lakes (swimming pools) can leak a lot, and our largest manmade lakes (dams) can also leak a lot the idea there's an in-between size that doesn't leak might need a bit of elaboration.
- p1mrx 6y agoThere's a big difference between a dam and a pool; the pool is supported by the ground, and even if you bash holes in it, the water still has to find somewhere to go. Also, pools are not typically built from concrete and stainless steel. The safety requirement here is not "doesn't leak", it's "holds most of the water for 30 days (after which water is not required)". You would have to get an implausibly-large leak, during a situation where nobody can add more water for a month.
- ses1984 6y agoIs your intense short sightedness and complete lack of imagination actually the same quality or two different ones?