Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

No EU nuclear reactor safe


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 34,051 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

  • In a flat world there is an explanation to everything.

Posted 04 October 2012 - 06:14 PM

European Voice said:


Europe's nuclear reactors need investments of between €10 billion and €25bn to bring them up to optimal safety standards, a final report on nuclear sites in Europe to be published by the European Commission today (4 October) is expected to conclude.

The ‘stress tests' of Europe's nuclear facilities were carried out in response to the nuclear accident in Fukushima, Japan 18 months ago. They were meant to test whether Europe's facilities could cope with natural and man-made disasters.

The latest draft of the report does not say that any nuclear reactor in Europe is too unsafe to operate. But it identifies concerns across Europe, including a lack of seismic measuring instruments, insufficient safety and rescue equipment, and inadequate emergency plans. The largest number of concerns was found in France.

Read more


A skeptic is a well informed believer and a pessimist a well informed optimist
The most dangerous views of the world are from those who have never seen it. ~ Alexander v. Humboldt
If you want to bulls**t me please do it so that it takes me more than a minute to find out

about me

#2    Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

    Omnipotent Entity

  • Member
  • 9,389 posts
  • Joined:13 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eire

  • Stupid Monkeys.

    Life Sucks.
    Get over it.

Posted 04 October 2012 - 06:57 PM

Now theres a surprise.
To cheap to meter :lol:

Br Cornelius

I believe nothing, but I have my suspicions.

Robert Anton Wilson

#3    Admiral Rhubarb

Admiral Rhubarb

    An Inspiration to Millions

  • Member
  • 23,275 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hammerfest

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 04 October 2012 - 07:13 PM

Ah, more material for the Luddites.
heavens, nothing at all can be absolutely guaranteed to be absolutely 100% safe against any conceivable eventuality, and it'd be a very foolish person who did claim that anything was. Classic piece of scaremongering.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


Posted Image


#4    Professor Buzzkill

Professor Buzzkill

    Integrity is all we have

  • Member
  • 2,579 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:White Cloud

Posted 04 October 2012 - 07:26 PM

View Post747400, on 04 October 2012 - 07:13 PM, said:

Ah, more material for the Luddites.
heavens, nothing at all can be absolutely guaranteed to be absolutely 100% safe against any conceivable eventuality, and it'd be a very foolish person who did claim that anything was. Classic piece of scaremongering.

But the difference between conventional power plants failing (like hydro/thermal or coal fired) and a nuclear power plant meltdown is a couple of thousand years of clean up.


#5    Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

    Omnipotent Entity

  • Member
  • 9,389 posts
  • Joined:13 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eire

  • Stupid Monkeys.

    Life Sucks.
    Get over it.

Posted 04 October 2012 - 07:26 PM

View Post747400, on 04 October 2012 - 07:13 PM, said:

Ah, more material for the Luddites.
heavens, nothing at all can be absolutely guaranteed to be absolutely 100% safe against any conceivable eventuality, and it'd be a very foolish person who did claim that anything was. Classic piece of scaremongering.
Risk consists of two elements;

-the likelihood of an event
-the consequences of an event

No matter how small the first is, it cannot outweight the consequences of it happening.

Remember that the number of serious accidents which have occurred within the Nuclear industry are in line with the statistical predictions made at the start of the Nuclear age. Thats right an event like Fukishima was inevitable from the start. I would ask you to go to Japan and actually ask some of the millions of people who will be effected - whether they consider those odds worth it.

Br Cornelius

I believe nothing, but I have my suspicions.

Robert Anton Wilson

#6    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 34,051 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

  • In a flat world there is an explanation to everything.

Posted 04 October 2012 - 07:28 PM

what makes me wonder about this is that German media has been reporting this since yesterday, sometimes even with very detailed reports, the rest of Europe is strangely silent.

A skeptic is a well informed believer and a pessimist a well informed optimist
The most dangerous views of the world are from those who have never seen it. ~ Alexander v. Humboldt
If you want to bulls**t me please do it so that it takes me more than a minute to find out

about me

#7    keithisco

keithisco

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,418 posts
  • Joined:06 May 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rincon de Loix, Benidorm

Posted 04 October 2012 - 08:37 PM

Risk Evaluation, and corresponding Safety Management Systems should be sufficient to determine that building a Nuclear Reactor for the provision of electrical energy, should not be entertained in known areas of Seismic disturbance... There is no inherent danger from building Nuclear Reactor Generators in seismically stable areas (assuming the Codes are adhered to) to consider them to be dangerous.  


#8    keithisco

keithisco

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,418 posts
  • Joined:06 May 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rincon de Loix, Benidorm

Posted 04 October 2012 - 08:40 PM

View PostBr Cornelius, on 04 October 2012 - 07:26 PM, said:

Risk consists of two elements;

-the likelihood of an event
-the consequences of an event

No matter how small the first is, it cannot outweight the consequences of it happening.

Remember that the number of serious accidents which have occurred within the Nuclear industry are in line with the statistical predictions made at the start of the Nuclear age. Thats right an event like Fukishima was inevitable from the start. I would ask you to go to Japan and actually ask some of the millions of people who will be effected - whether they consider those odds worth it.

Br Cornelius

Whilst correct at a basic level, when the analysis is done you then have to attribute Barriers and Mitigation. Barriers to prevent the Hazard, and mitigation to prevent the hazard becoming an Outcome.


#9    Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

    Omnipotent Entity

  • Member
  • 9,389 posts
  • Joined:13 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eire

  • Stupid Monkeys.

    Life Sucks.
    Get over it.

Posted 04 October 2012 - 08:46 PM

View Postkeithisco, on 04 October 2012 - 08:40 PM, said:

Whilst correct at a basic level, when the analysis is done you then have to attribute Barriers and Mitigation. Barriers to prevent the Hazard, and mitigation to prevent the hazard becoming an Outcome.

The nature of risk is such that there is always an inherent uncertainty to any system. Fuskishima did not fail because of failures of its systems - it failed because they failed to anticipate an event such a tidal wave of such magnitude. At a certain level mitigation's are never enough.
The Nuclear industry is intrinsically one of the safest industries possible - but the predictions of accidents are based upon this unknown or unanticipated risk. As such the events which have happened over the last 50yrs or so, are predicted by the initial risk assessments and their assumptions of what can and cannot be known in advance.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius, 04 October 2012 - 08:47 PM.

I believe nothing, but I have my suspicions.

Robert Anton Wilson

#10    keithisco

keithisco

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,418 posts
  • Joined:06 May 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rincon de Loix, Benidorm

Posted 05 October 2012 - 05:37 AM

I agree... there is always residual risk no matter how good the Safety Case and System in place.  However, there was clearly one or more risks unaddressed in the Catastrophic category that someone had determined to be as low as reasonably practicable. (ALARP) erroneously.

It is probable that the Authorities assessed the barriers to be so robust as to reduce the Risk to Extremely Remote or Extremely Improbable, which in a seismically active region simply cannot be achieved in the field of Nuclear Energy Production with Fusion Reactors.

Someone took their eye -off - the - ball, in this incident the same with 3 Mile Island, and Chernobyl. It is likely that Political pressure was applied in Fukishima because Japan was desperate for Energy.

It remains inexcusable for anyone , or any commercial / political entity to put pressure on the compilers of a Safety Case to "massage" the results of a Functional Failure Analysis to meet external aims.


#11    stevewinn

stevewinn

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 8,206 posts
  • Joined:05 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Liverpool, England

  • Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival

Posted 05 October 2012 - 10:29 AM

View Postquestionmark, on 04 October 2012 - 07:28 PM, said:

what makes me wonder about this is that German media has been reporting this since yesterday, sometimes even with very detailed reports, the rest of Europe is strangely silent.

you know very well why the rest are silent and the germans are reporting it. the fact that wouldn't have escaped your mind but wanted someone else to write it, - so i will, German is to close all their nuclear power stations by 2020. where the rest of europe are to continue with nuclear power.

Posted Image

British by Birth - English by the Grace of God




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users