A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

OT japans nuclear plant was known to be at risk



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old December 31st 11, 07:51 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default OT japans nuclear plant was known to be at risk

On Dec 29, 3:05*pm, bob haller wrote:
On Dec 29, 4:07*pm, Brad Guth wrote:









On Dec 29, 5:44*am, bob haller wrote:


Fukushima plant's backup generator failed in 1991


The operator of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant failed to take
preventive measures after a backup generator was inundated by a
leaking pipe 20 years ago.


Former employees of the Tokyo Electric Power Company told NHK that the
problem occurred in October 1991.


They said water leaked from a pipe and entered the basement of the
Number 1 reactor's turbine building. This caused the failure of one of
the two backup generators.


A former engineer at the Fukushima plant said he told his superiors
that tsunami could damage the emergency generators in the basement, as
the turbine buildings are close to the sea.


TEPCO installed doors to block water leaks in the rooms hosting the
backup generators, but did not move them above ground to avoid tsunami
damage.


The plant's reactor cooling system failed when the emergency
generators in the basement were inundated by the March 11th tsunami.
All power sources were lost.


Japan's Nuclear Safety Commission says it will revise the safety
guidelines for designing nuclear plants and require the installation
of additional power sources.


Thursday, December 29, 2011 13:18 +0900 (JST)


GE did a fine job of configuring those reactors to begin with, and
ever since there has been hardly if any upgrades or logical
improvements. *So, Japan got exactly what they paid for, and GE made a
small fortune.


*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


just look at the chernobyl cancer rates and realize japans meltdown
was far worse than chernobyl.

chernobyl was a single reactor that was nearly brand new

while japan was 4 40 year old reactors and storage pools


Exactly, and GE always knew the risk and the likely consequences.

Even as of that 40+ year old era, thorium reactors could have been the
norm.

They wanted us electric rate payers to essentially pay for the
production of plutonium, and they honestly didn't give any crap about
the risk.

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
  #12  
Old December 31st 11, 07:58 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default OT japans nuclear plant was known to be at risk

On Dec 30, 5:50*am, bob haller wrote:
On Dec 29, 7:00*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:









bob haller wrote:
On Dec 29, 4:07*pm, Brad Guth wrote:
On Dec 29, 5:44*am, bob haller wrote:


Fukushima plant's backup generator failed in 1991


The operator of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant failed to take
preventive measures after a backup generator was inundated by a
leaking pipe 20 years ago.


Former employees of the Tokyo Electric Power Company told NHK that the
problem occurred in October 1991.


They said water leaked from a pipe and entered the basement of the
Number 1 reactor's turbine building. This caused the failure of one of
the two backup generators.


A former engineer at the Fukushima plant said he told his superiors
that tsunami could damage the emergency generators in the basement, as
the turbine buildings are close to the sea.


TEPCO installed doors to block water leaks in the rooms hosting the
backup generators, but did not move them above ground to avoid tsunami
damage.


The plant's reactor cooling system failed when the emergency
generators in the basement were inundated by the March 11th tsunami.
All power sources were lost.


Japan's Nuclear Safety Commission says it will revise the safety
guidelines for designing nuclear plants and require the installation
of additional power sources.


Thursday, December 29, 2011 13:18 +0900 (JST)


GE did a fine job of configuring those reactors to begin with, and
ever since there has been hardly if any upgrades or logical
improvements. *So, Japan got exactly what they paid for, and GE made a
small fortune.


*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


just look at the chernobyl cancer rates and realize japans meltdown
was far worse than chernobyl.


Utter hogwash. *Chernobyl was a much, much worse accident.


chernobyl was a single reactor that was nearly brand new


while japan was 4 40 year old reactors and storage pools


And the comparative radiation release between Chernobyl, where the
core actually caught fire and exploded, and what was released at
Fukishima is?


Afraid this is yet another Bobbert claim that raises the cry of
"Bull****!"


--
"You take the lies out of him, and he'll shrink to the size of
*your hat; you take the malice out of him, and he'll disappear."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *-- Mark Twain- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


theres no real way to quantify the radiation leak into the ocean, and
as of now no one knows how badly the containment is breached, just
that they have failed....

my long term prediction, major structural containment failure with
parts of the melted down core under the buildings.

locating by the ocean may have prevented a total explosion destroying
the entire plant.

once the melting down core got thru the bottom of the containment the
high ground water level because its by the ocean made the entire mess
self cooling.

lets not forget GE engineers predicted a containment leak for this
design of reactors because they were built to save bucks, and the
engineers quit over the issue.

worse some of the storage pools exploded and burned, releasing 40
years of waste core nuke waste


Fred is a devout ZNR (Zionist Nazi Republican) of the Qinetiq-NA kind,
so what else could we possibly expect from his redneck flapping butt-
cheeks.

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
  #13  
Old December 31st 11, 07:58 PM posted to sci.space.policy
[email protected] |
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 307
Default OT japans nuclear plant was known to be at risk

On Dec 30, 10:58*pm, Brad Guth wrote:
On Dec 30, 5:50*am, bob haller wrote:









On Dec 29, 7:00*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:


bob haller wrote:
On Dec 29, 4:07*pm, Brad Guth wrote:
On Dec 29, 5:44*am, bob haller wrote:


Fukushima plant's backup generator failed in 1991


The operator of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant failed to take
preventive measures after a backup generator was inundated by a
leaking pipe 20 years ago.


Former employees of the Tokyo Electric Power Company told NHK that the
problem occurred in October 1991.


They said water leaked from a pipe and entered the basement of the
Number 1 reactor's turbine building. This caused the failure of one of
the two backup generators.


A former engineer at the Fukushima plant said he told his superiors
that tsunami could damage the emergency generators in the basement, as
the turbine buildings are close to the sea.


TEPCO installed doors to block water leaks in the rooms hosting the
backup generators, but did not move them above ground to avoid tsunami
damage.


The plant's reactor cooling system failed when the emergency
generators in the basement were inundated by the March 11th tsunami.
All power sources were lost.


Japan's Nuclear Safety Commission says it will revise the safety
guidelines for designing nuclear plants and require the installation
of additional power sources.


Thursday, December 29, 2011 13:18 +0900 (JST)


GE did a fine job of configuring those reactors to begin with, and
ever since there has been hardly if any upgrades or logical
improvements. *So, Japan got exactly what they paid for, and GE made a
small fortune.


*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


just look at the chernobyl cancer rates and realize japans meltdown
was far worse than chernobyl.


Utter hogwash. *Chernobyl was a much, much worse accident.


chernobyl was a single reactor that was nearly brand new


while japan was 4 40 year old reactors and storage pools


And the comparative radiation release between Chernobyl, where the
core actually caught fire and exploded, and what was released at
Fukishima is?


Afraid this is yet another Bobbert claim that raises the cry of
"Bull****!"


--
"You take the lies out of him, and he'll shrink to the size of
*your hat; you take the malice out of him, and he'll disappear."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *-- Mark Twain- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


theres no real way to quantify the radiation leak into the ocean, and
as of now no one knows how badly the containment is breached, just
that they have failed....


my long term prediction, major structural containment failure with
parts of the melted down core under the buildings.


locating by the ocean may have prevented a total explosion destroying
the entire plant.


once the melting down core got thru the bottom of the containment the
high ground water level because its by the ocean made the entire mess
self cooling.


lets not forget GE engineers predicted a containment leak for this
design of reactors because they were built to save bucks, and the
engineers quit over the issue.


worse some of the storage pools exploded and burned, releasing 40
years of waste core nuke waste


Fred is a devout ZNR (Zionist Nazi Republican) of the Qinetiq-NA kind,
so what else could we possibly expect from his redneck flapping butt-
cheeks.

*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”


What label would you use on yourself?

I'll add a view of myself as a guy who take a drink with Mark Twain
albeit as person a bit happier than Samuel Clemens.

...............Trig
  #14  
Old December 31st 11, 08:13 PM posted to sci.space.policy
[email protected] |
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 307
Default OT japans nuclear plant was known to be at risk

On Dec 30, 10:51*pm, Brad Guth wrote:
On Dec 29, 3:05*pm, bob haller wrote:









On Dec 29, 4:07*pm, Brad Guth wrote:


On Dec 29, 5:44*am, bob haller wrote:


Fukushima plant's backup generator failed in 1991


The operator of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant failed to take
preventive measures after a backup generator was inundated by a
leaking pipe 20 years ago.


Former employees of the Tokyo Electric Power Company told NHK that the
problem occurred in October 1991.


They said water leaked from a pipe and entered the basement of the
Number 1 reactor's turbine building. This caused the failure of one of
the two backup generators.


A former engineer at the Fukushima plant said he told his superiors
that tsunami could damage the emergency generators in the basement, as
the turbine buildings are close to the sea.


TEPCO installed doors to block water leaks in the rooms hosting the
backup generators, but did not move them above ground to avoid tsunami
damage.


The plant's reactor cooling system failed when the emergency
generators in the basement were inundated by the March 11th tsunami..
All power sources were lost.


Japan's Nuclear Safety Commission says it will revise the safety
guidelines for designing nuclear plants and require the installation
of additional power sources.


Thursday, December 29, 2011 13:18 +0900 (JST)


GE did a fine job of configuring those reactors to begin with, and
ever since there has been hardly if any upgrades or logical
improvements. *So, Japan got exactly what they paid for, and GE made a
small fortune.


*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


just look at the chernobyl cancer rates and realize japans meltdown
was far worse than chernobyl.


chernobyl was a single reactor that was nearly brand new


while japan was 4 40 year old reactors and storage pools


Exactly, and GE always knew the risk and the likely consequences.

Even as of that 40+ year old era, thorium reactors could have been the
norm.

They wanted us electric rate payers to essentially pay for the
production of plutonium, and they honestly didn't give any crap about
the risk.

*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”


That leaves some thing to extract and in a pinch to use to build a
you know what. No matter the reactor park when wrecked "sinks"
the land of the rising sun.

Of course a nuclear device that goes bang delivered by an oxcart
to a nuclear reactor is something pretty close to a doomsday device.
It wouldn't matter whether the reactor targeted is uranium based or
thorium based. It might matter is the reactor was in a mountian as
opposed to on the surface. But there would be a different set of
risks in the face of in the event of a large quake for a reactor
under a mountain.

The Japanese it seems need to move a huge portion of their population.
Perhaps they can invade Antarctica or buy Greenland from the
natives?

a simple mutant peasant hoeing his potatoes somewhere in
the
Andes............................................. .....................Trig


  #15  
Old December 31st 11, 09:41 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default OT japans nuclear plant was known to be at risk

On Dec 31, 11:13*am, |"
wrote:
On Dec 30, 10:51*pm, wrote:









On Dec 29, 3:05*pm, bob haller wrote:


On Dec 29, 4:07*pm, wrote:


On Dec 29, 5:44*am, bob haller wrote:


Fukushima plant's backup generator failed in 1991


The operator of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant failed to take
preventive measures after a backup generator was inundated by a
leaking pipe 20 years ago.


Former employees of the Tokyo Electric Power Company told NHK that the
problem occurred in October 1991.


They said water leaked from a pipe and entered the basement of the
Number 1 reactor's turbine building. This caused the failure of one of
the two backup generators.


A former engineer at the Fukushima plant said he told his superiors
that tsunami could damage the emergency generators in the basement, as
the turbine buildings are close to the sea.


TEPCO installed doors to block water leaks in the rooms hosting the
backup generators, but did not move them above ground to avoid tsunami
damage.


The plant's reactor cooling system failed when the emergency
generators in the basement were inundated by the March 11th tsunami.
All power sources were lost.


Japan'sNuclear Safety Commission says it will revise the safety
guidelines for designing nuclear plants and require the installation
of additional power sources.


Thursday, December 29, 2011 13:18 +0900 (JST)


GE did a fine job of configuring those reactors to begin with, and
ever since there has been hardly if any upgrades or logical
improvements. *So,Japangot exactly what they paid for, and GE made a
small fortune.


*http://translate.google.com/#
*BradGuth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “GuthUsenet”- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


just look at the chernobyl cancer rates and realize japans meltdown
was far worse than chernobyl.


chernobyl was a single reactor that was nearly brand new


whilejapanwas 4 40 year old reactors and storage pools


Exactly, and GE always knew the risk and the likely consequences.


Even as of that 40+ year old era, thorium reactors could have been the
norm.


They wanted us electric rate payers to essentially pay for the
production of plutonium, and they honestly didn't give any crap about
the risk.


*http://translate.google.com/#
*BradGuth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “GuthUsenet”


That leaves some thing to extract and in a pinch to use to build a
you know what. No matter the reactor park when wrecked "sinks"
the land of the rising sun.

Of course a nuclear device that goes bang delivered by an oxcart
to a nuclear reactor is something pretty close to a doomsday device.
It wouldn't matter whether the reactor targeted is uranium based or
thorium based. It might matter is the reactor was in a mountian as
opposed to on the surface. But there would be a different set of
risks in the face of in the event of a large quake for a reactor
under a mountain.

The Japanese it seems need to move a huge portion of their population.
Perhaps they can invade Antarctica or buy Greenland from the
natives?

a simple mutant peasant hoeing his potatoes somewhere in
the
Andes............................................. .....................Trig


You obviously know little about using thorium. Thorium can be safely
delivered by an oxcart, and its spent fuel is practically a non-issue,
as well as any sort of dirty bomb or real nuclear WMD just isn't going
to happen by way of reactors being run with thorium fuel.

Using conventional uranium or worse MOX fuel is not only spendy but
highly problematic from the very get-go. Those much safer AP-1000
reactor configurations should have been the case as of a decade before
the earthquake, and of course GE as well as our Sandia National
Laboratories always knew this.

Ring seals are among the first significant species to pay the ultimate
price.
http://news.yahoo.com/scientists-tes...003224466.html

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

  #16  
Old December 31st 11, 09:47 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Bob Haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,197
Default OT japans nuclear plant was known to be at risk

On Dec 31, 3:41*pm, Brad Guth wrote:
On Dec 31, 11:13*am, |"





wrote:
On Dec 30, 10:51*pm, wrote:


On Dec 29, 3:05*pm, bob haller wrote:


On Dec 29, 4:07*pm, wrote:


On Dec 29, 5:44*am, bob haller wrote:


Fukushima plant's backup generator failed in 1991


The operator of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant failed to take
preventive measures after a backup generator was inundated by a
leaking pipe 20 years ago.


Former employees of the Tokyo Electric Power Company told NHK that the
problem occurred in October 1991.


They said water leaked from a pipe and entered the basement of the
Number 1 reactor's turbine building. This caused the failure of one of
the two backup generators.


A former engineer at the Fukushima plant said he told his superiors
that tsunami could damage the emergency generators in the basement, as
the turbine buildings are close to the sea.


TEPCO installed doors to block water leaks in the rooms hosting the
backup generators, but did not move them above ground to avoid tsunami
damage.


The plant's reactor cooling system failed when the emergency
generators in the basement were inundated by the March 11th tsunami.
All power sources were lost.


Japan'sNuclear Safety Commission says it will revise the safety
guidelines for designing nuclear plants and require the installation
of additional power sources.


Thursday, December 29, 2011 13:18 +0900 (JST)


GE did a fine job of configuring those reactors to begin with, and
ever since there has been hardly if any upgrades or logical
improvements. *So,Japangot exactly what they paid for, and GE made a
small fortune.


*http://translate.google.com/#
*BradGuth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “GuthUsenet”- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


just look at the chernobyl cancer rates and realize japans meltdown
was far worse than chernobyl.


chernobyl was a single reactor that was nearly brand new


whilejapanwas 4 40 year old reactors and storage pools


Exactly, and GE always knew the risk and the likely consequences.


Even as of that 40+ year old era, thorium reactors could have been the
norm.


They wanted us electric rate payers to essentially pay for the
production of plutonium, and they honestly didn't give any crap about
the risk.


*http://translate.google.com/#
*BradGuth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “GuthUsenet”


That leaves some thing to extract and in a pinch to use to build a
you know what. No matter the reactor park when wrecked "sinks"
the land of the rising sun.


Of course a nuclear device that goes bang delivered by an oxcart
to a nuclear reactor is something pretty close to a doomsday device.
It wouldn't matter whether the reactor targeted is uranium based or
thorium based. It might matter is the reactor was in a mountian as
opposed to on the surface. But there would be a different set of
risks in the face of in the event of a large quake for a reactor
under a mountain.


The Japanese it seems need to move a huge portion of their population.
Perhaps they can invade Antarctica or buy Greenland from the
natives?


a simple mutant peasant hoeing his potatoes somewhere in
the
Andes............................................. .....................Trig


You obviously know little about using thorium. *Thorium can be safely
delivered by an oxcart, and its spent fuel is practically a non-issue,
as well as any sort of dirty bomb or real nuclear WMD just isn't going
to happen by way of reactors being run with thorium fuel.

Using conventional uranium or worse MOX fuel is not only spendy but
highly problematic from the very get-go. *Those much safer AP-1000
reactor configurations should have been the case as of a decade before
the earthquake, and of course GE as well as our Sandia National
Laboratories always knew this.

Ring seals are among the first significant species to pay the ultimate
price.
*http://news.yahoo.com/scientists-tes...-radiation-003....

*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


japan and hopefully everyone else must now realize nuke plants are a
good terrorism target.....

espically those plants with elevated non hardened waste core storage
pools, thats nearly all the GE BWR reactors
  #17  
Old December 31st 11, 11:02 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default OT japans nuclear plant was known to be at risk

On Dec 31, 10:58*am, |"
wrote:
On Dec 30, 10:58*pm, wrote:









On Dec 30, 5:50*am, bob haller wrote:


On Dec 29, 7:00*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:


bob haller wrote:
On Dec 29, 4:07*pm, wrote:
On Dec 29, 5:44*am, bob haller wrote:


Fukushima plant's backup generator failed in 1991


The operator of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant failed to take
preventive measures after a backup generator was inundated by a
leaking pipe 20 years ago.


Former employees of the Tokyo Electric Power Company told NHK that the
problem occurred in October 1991.


They said water leaked from a pipe and entered the basement of the
Number 1 reactor's turbine building. This caused the failure of one of
the two backup generators.


A former engineer at the Fukushima plant said he told his superiors
that tsunami could damage the emergency generators in the basement, as
the turbine buildings are close to the sea.


TEPCO installed doors to block water leaks in the rooms hosting the
backup generators, but did not move them above ground to avoid tsunami
damage.


The plant's reactor cooling system failed when the emergency
generators in the basement were inundated by the March 11th tsunami.
All power sources were lost.


Japan'sNuclear Safety Commission says it will revise the safety
guidelines for designing nuclear plants and require the installation
of additional power sources.


Thursday, December 29, 2011 13:18 +0900 (JST)


GE did a fine job of configuring those reactors to begin with, and
ever since there has been hardly if any upgrades or logical
improvements. *So,Japangot exactly what they paid for, and GE made a
small fortune.


*http://translate.google.com/#
*BradGuth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “GuthUsenet”- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


just look at the chernobyl cancer rates and realize japans meltdown
was far worse than chernobyl.


Utter hogwash. *Chernobyl was a much, much worse accident.


chernobyl was a single reactor that was nearly brand new


whilejapanwas 4 40 year old reactors and storage pools


And the comparativeradiationrelease between Chernobyl, where the
core actually caught fire and exploded, and what was released at
Fukishima is?


Afraid this is yet another Bobbert claim that raises the cry of
"Bull****!"


--
"You take the lies out of him, and he'll shrink to the size of
*your hat; you take the malice out of him, and he'll disappear."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *-- Mark Twain- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


theres no real way to quantify theradiationleak into the ocean, and
as of now no one knows how badly the containment is breached, just
that they have failed....


my long term prediction, major structural containment failure with
parts of the melted down core under the buildings.


locating by the ocean may have prevented a total explosion destroying
the entire plant.


once the melting down core got thru the bottom of the containment the
high ground water level because its by the ocean made the entire mess
self cooling.


lets not forget GE engineers predicted a containment leak for this
design of reactors because they were built to save bucks, and the
engineers quit over the issue.


worse some of the storage pools exploded and burned, releasing 40
years of waste core nuke waste


Fred is a devout ZNR (Zionist Nazi Republican) of the Qinetiq-NA kind,
so what else could we possibly expect from his redneck flapping butt-
cheeks.


*http://translate.google.com/#
*BradGuth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “GuthUsenet”


What label would you use on yourself?

I'll add a view of myself as a guy who take a drink with Mark Twain
albeit as person a bit happier than Samuel Clemens.

..............Trig


I'm more like those TV/movie acting characters of Dirty Harry or The
Terminator, each going after those bad guys, which includes nailing
all those others that profit but refuse to police their own kind.

Japan seems to have an energy mafia, that needs to get terminated.

If there's an all-inclusive cheaper, better and more failsafe method
of obtaining energy, I'm all for it. Using thorium instead of uranium
fits rather nicely into my plan, not that William Mook's version of
solar derived hydrogen and then way better synfuel from coal isn't
another perfectly good alternative to conventional hydrocarbons, that
works nicely along with my dual-fuel utilization of HTP+synfuel as a
nearly ideal liquid fueled alternative to gasoline and diesel. Even
the 50% h2o2 battery, as a liquid energy cell that's offering way
better density and cheaper than lithium, isn't such a bad idea.

We simply have to take the birth-to-grave or all-inclusive cost and
consequences of everything into account.

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
  #18  
Old December 31st 11, 11:08 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default OT japans nuclear plant was known to be at risk

On Dec 29, 7:10*pm, |"
wrote:
On Dec 29, 5:44*am, bob haller wrote:









Fukushima plant's backup generator failed in 1991


The operator of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant failed to take
preventive measures after a backup generator was inundated by a
leaking pipe 20 years ago.


Former employees of the Tokyo Electric Power Company told NHK that the
problem occurred in October 1991.


They said water leaked from a pipe and entered the basement of the
Number 1 reactor's turbine building. This caused the failure of one of
the two backup generators.


A former engineer at the Fukushima plant said he told his superiors
that tsunami could damage the emergency generators in the basement, as
the turbine buildings are close to the sea.


TEPCO installed doors to block water leaks in the rooms hosting the
backup generators, but did not move them above ground to avoid tsunami
damage.


The plant's reactor cooling system failed when the emergency
generators in the basement were inundated by the March 11th tsunami.
All power sources were lost.


Japan'sNuclear Safety Commission says it will revise the safety
guidelines for designing nuclear plants and require the installation
of additional power sources.


Thursday, December 29, 2011 13:18 +0900 (JST)


It maybe the earthquake nailed the reactor(S) and the wave damage is
little
more than an after thought for use by the utility PR boys.

Bloody memory, I don't recall the details as I
like......................Trig


Lots of stuff went wrong, and the energy mafia in charge wasn't
prepared for squat going wrong.

Others will likely keep reminding us, and those seals will keep dieing
from radiation.

http://news.yahoo.com/scientists-tes...003224466.html

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

  #19  
Old December 31st 11, 11:19 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Bob Haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,197
Default OT japans nuclear plant was known to be at risk

fred marks everyone one of his posts to disappear in weeks if not
sooner.....

given freds unstable rants has he wondered what his employeer would
say if they got all his posts history.

he claims to work for a government defense contractor. they might be
very interested in his rants.....

although he might do no more than cut grass at a defense contractor,
or be a janitor spwecializing in toiletelogy, thats cleaning
toilets.......

  #20  
Old January 1st 12, 05:02 AM posted to sci.space.policy
[email protected] |
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 307
Default OT japans nuclear plant was known to be at risk

On Dec 31, 2:08*pm, Brad Guth wrote:
On Dec 29, 7:10*pm, |"









wrote:
On Dec 29, 5:44*am, bob haller wrote:


Fukushima plant's backup generator failed in 1991


The operator of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant failed to take
preventive measures after a backup generator was inundated by a
leaking pipe 20 years ago.


Former employees of the Tokyo Electric Power Company told NHK that the
problem occurred in October 1991.


They said water leaked from a pipe and entered the basement of the
Number 1 reactor's turbine building. This caused the failure of one of
the two backup generators.


A former engineer at the Fukushima plant said he told his superiors
that tsunami could damage the emergency generators in the basement, as
the turbine buildings are close to the sea.


TEPCO installed doors to block water leaks in the rooms hosting the
backup generators, but did not move them above ground to avoid tsunami
damage.


The plant's reactor cooling system failed when the emergency
generators in the basement were inundated by the March 11th tsunami.
All power sources were lost.


Japan'sNuclear Safety Commission says it will revise the safety
guidelines for designing nuclear plants and require the installation
of additional power sources.


Thursday, December 29, 2011 13:18 +0900 (JST)


It maybe the earthquake nailed the reactor(S) and the wave damage is
little
more than an after thought for use by the utility PR boys.


Bloody memory, I don't recall the details as I
like......................Trig


Lots of stuff went wrong, and the energy mafia in charge wasn't
prepared for squat going wrong.

Others will likely keep reminding us, and those seals will keep dieing
from radiation.

*http://news.yahoo.com/scientists-tes...-radiation-003....

*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”


Not a proven thing on the seals, but it certainly does raise an issue
of what the seals and other marine creatures use as their range.

Nuclear Reactors last too long or are run too long;
they waste too much steel and leave lasting waste.

Trig
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Japans budget buster crippled nuke plant costs 250 Billion and rising bob haller Policy 7 June 1st 11 02:06 PM
OT Russian floating nuclear power plant. Pat Flannery Policy 2 September 28th 07 08:45 AM
OT Russian floating nuclear power plant. Pat Flannery History 2 September 28th 07 08:45 AM
Trojan Nuclear Plant Cooling Tower Coming Down! Double-A Misc 12 May 22nd 06 03:31 PM
Russians planning nuclear power plant on Mars Ultimate Buu Policy 0 August 19th 03 02:50 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.