4 ms·
Until a better, safer replacement is found, we'll use cars, and nuclear plants. I'd wager the change of mind will happen rather quickly after the first terrori
by moe 15y ago
Until a better, safer replacement is found, we'll use cars, and nuclear plants.
I'd wager the change of mind will happen rather quickly after the first terrorist crashes a plane into an US nuclear facility.
- vukk 15y agohttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZjhxuhTmGk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZjhxuhTmGk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7eI4vvlupY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7eI4vvlupY
- moe 15y agoImpressive video. However, I wonder if that test would look as good with a real passenger jet. According to wikipedia the empty weight of a Phantom F4 is 30,328 lb. The empty weight of a Boeing 737 is up to 80,000 lb (almost 3x as much). The empty weight of an A380 is 610,000 lb (20 times as much).
- eliasmacpherson 15y agoWould that the walls of the containment area on the reactors in Fukushima were that thick.
- Typhon 15y agoI'm pretty sure a big earthquake followed by a tsunami is more damaging than a plane crash.
- lispm 15y agoThe recent review of reactor safety here in Germany found that not a single site would survive a large passenger aircraft crashing into it. http://www.bz-berlin.de/aktuell/deutschland/kein-deutsches-akw-sicher-vor-jet-absturz-article1184819.html http://www.bz-berlin.de/aktuell/deutschland/kein-deutsches-a...
- Typhon 15y agoI don't read German. >« not a single site would survive a large passenger aircraft crashing into it. » Now, what does that even mean ? If surviving means "keep on working", obviously not. If it means destruction of the protection layers of concrete around the reactor, it's more dangerous, but just because the reactor is open, it doesn't mean the radioactive material is going to fly away.
- moe 15y agojust because the reactor is open, it doesn't mean the radioactive material is going to fly away. How is the radiation supposed to be contained when your reactor just turned into a burning pile of rubble?
- Typhon 15y agoThat's exactly why it's dangerous to anyone near the plant, as opposed to a Chernobyl-style or Fukushima-style disaster, where radioactive material is disseminated.
- moe 15y agoSo, your reactor was just turned into a burning pile of radioactive rubble by having something like 150,000 lb of mass smashed into it. And you say radioactive material will not disseminate?
- Typhon 15y agoNot on a comparable scale. Besides, reactors are a small target that's mostly underground. That should limit the damage. In any case, may I remind you we're discussing a very hypothetical scenario ?
- eliasmacpherson 15y agoWeeks after Fukushima alleged terrorists were found making their way towards Sellafield in the UK. The obvious viability of this hypothetical attack became apparent after March 11th.