6 ms·
441 nuclear reactors have been operating flawlessly for over a decade. Fascinating choice of timeframe: "over a decade". How about going back just one more ye
by PhantomGremlin 5y ago
441 nuclear reactors have been operating flawlessly for over a decade.
Fascinating choice of timeframe: "over a decade".
How about going back just one more year. We can find multiple nuclear reactors blowing themselves up quite spectacularly on TV:
Over the following three weeks there was evidence of partial nuclear meltdowns in units 1, 2 and 3: visible explosions, suspected to be caused by hydrogen gas, in units 1 and 3; a suspected explosion in unit 2, that may have damaged the primary containment vessel; and a possible uncovering of the Spent fuel pools in Units 1, 3 and 4.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_Nuclear_Power_Plant#Nuclear_disaster_of_March_11,_2011 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_Nuclear_Powe...
Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?
- edmcnulty101 5y agoyou're missing my entire point. I never said that nuclear reactors don't have problems I would be an idiot to say that. Everyone on Earth knows nuclear reactors have problems. Statistically though it's a very very unlikely. What it sounded like you were saying is that because human error exists....we should shut down all nuclear reactors and biology labs. I don't agree with that.