LogFAQs > #902934084

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, Database 3 ( 02.21.2018-07.23.2018 ), DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	So if all the nuclear-powered first world countries...
DarkTransient 06/10/18 9:30:35 PM #16:	booboy posted... DarkTransient posted... booboy posted... I agree that modern designs are very safe and extremely efficient. My problem is that people will still be stupid enough to overpower every safety mechanism. If even Japan was a victim of corporate greed and cost-cutting at the nuclear level, then I can't really see trusting anyone else to not fuck it up. "Outdated design" was also a huge factor there. Newer designs are designed so that even a deliberate attempt to fuck things up, let alone negligence, is unlikely to do any damage to anything beyond the power plant itself. And if / when they finally have a successful nuclear fusion reactor design, that "unlikely" changes to "impossible". So what would be the earliest year considered a "Newer" design? Look up the generations of nuclear reactors. Generation III is the latest that exists outside of experimental reactors; the first Generation III reactor went online in 1996, although that doesn't by any means mean that no Generation II reactors have gone online since then too - the United States had a new Gen2 go online just two years ago. (By comparison, Chernobyl was a Generation I (aka "disaster waiting to happen unless you operate it perfectly") and Fukushima was a Generation II (a bit safer, but still not that hard to mess up).) --- http://www.facebook.com/loaocos/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAfJB3KYYDg <cite>DarkTransient posted [p:902934084] in So if all ... [t:76694942]...</cite> <quote><cite>booboy posted...</cite> <quote><cite>DarkTransient posted...</cite> <quote><cite>booboy posted...</cite> <quote>I agree that modern designs are very safe and extremely efficient. My problem is that people will still be stupid enough to overpower every safety mechanism. If even Japan was a victim of corporate greed and cost-cutting at the nuclear level, then I can't really see trusting anyone else to not fuck it up.</quote> "Outdated design" was also a huge factor there. Newer designs are designed so that even a deliberate attempt to fuck things up, let alone negligence, is unlikely to do any damage to anything beyond the power plant itself. And if / when they finally have a successful nuclear fusion reactor design, that "unlikely" changes to "impossible".</quote> So what would be the earliest year considered a "Newer" design?</quote> Look up the generations of nuclear reactors. Generation III is the latest that exists outside of experimental reactors; the first Generation III reactor went online in 1996, although that doesn't by any means mean that no Generation II reactors have gone online since then too - the United States had a new Gen2 go online just two years ago. (By comparison, Chernobyl was a Generation I (aka "disaster waiting to happen unless you operate it perfectly") and Fukushima was a Generation II (a bit safer, but still not that hard to mess up).) --- http://www.facebook.com/loaocos/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAfJB3KYYDg</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1