Is this guy a UER guy? Haven't seen these flix posted anywhere.





http://gizmodo.com..._medium=socialflow

He is, but he rarely visits. Last login was 2013. I suspect he's travelling all around the world all the time rather than going online.

Wow. What a wonderful write-up. It astounds me of the stupidity of people sometimes though.

"...nuclear waste—because as it stands, the itty bitty island of Cuba would have had no suitable place to dispose of it. In which case, off to the ocean it'd go... "



this is absolutely true though.

Wow, pretty epic location and photoset though!

One thing is strange -- Soviet VVER reactors are not reliable as the article states.
Any accidents with these type of Soviet/Russian reactors on the record?
Why then Fukushima Westinghouse designed super-reliable reactor failed? (Though it was a boiler type...)

The article is super biased, I belive.
Accidets just happen -- it does not depend on a nation.

I tend to agree. This is biased

Posted by Jack8rkin it does not depend on a nation.

unless the nation is irresponsible, whether deliberate or not.

this article is pretty biased, however the set is excellent!

Posted by RescueMe1060 unless the nation is irresponsible, whether deliberate or not.

All nations utilizing nuclear energy are irresponsible then. I believe each and every nation has had an accident on a nuclear station -- whether it is a minor one or a large one.

Those are some pretty spectacular remains. Reminds me of Spiders but arguably more epic!

Posted by Jack8rkin All nations utilizing nuclear energy are irresponsible then. I believe each and every nation has had an accident on a nuclear station -- whether it is a minor one or a large one.

What's worse. . . carbon emissions from fossil fuel based reactors where we have no clue how to contain the damage or nuclear, where advancements in technology could make it so the bi-products are completely inert? All energy production options have there major flaws.

Posted by Jack8rkin One thing is strange -- Soviet VVER reactors are not reliable as the article states. Any accidents with these type of Soviet/Russian reactors on the record? Why then Fukushima Westinghouse designed super-reliable reactor failed? (Though it was a boiler type...) The article is super biased, I belive. Accidets just happen -- it does not depend on a nation.

the Japanese catastrophe was part bad planning, part mismanagement and part bad luck. The Japanese should've known better than to build a reactor where they did. It was just a matter of time before the sea stepped in and gave it the big fuck you.

I used to live not even three miles from Watts Bar Nuclear One when I lived in Evensville, TN. That was about 30 miles from Sequoyah Nuclear in Soddy-Daisy,TN... To be honest, it never bothered me.

The thing with nuclear power is that there are better technologies here and now for nuclear power that eschew the old technologies that are, more or less, 1950's technology. Ever hear of a pebble-bed reactor? Of course not. It's meltdown proof. Used one third the fuel of a conventional reactor, uses helium gas as an agitator. Looks like a gumball machine. Helium gas stops the balls from circulating, reaction stops, end of story. The spent fuel is also easier to dispose of, even though there is more of it. The West Germans pooped around with idea in the 80's and a little bit of a mishap when a ball got stuck. Oops. The technology may have caught up with it, but the science behind it is sound. (<----this is an oversimplification, but oh well... look it up yourself for the whole history of the thing)


There was a fascinating wikipedia (yeah, i know... wikipedia, right? Meh, it's a place to start the trip) article about operating nuclear power reactors in the US and ones that have been decommissioned.

Posted by Samurai the Japanese catastrophe was part bad planning, part mismanagement and part bad luck. The Japanese should've known better than to build a reactor where they did. It was just a matter of time before the sea stepped in and gave it the big fuck you. I used to live not even three miles from Watts Bar Nuclear One when I lived in Evensville, TN. That was about 30 miles from Sequoyah Nuclear in Soddy-Daisy,TN... To be honest, it never bothered me. The thing with nuclear power is that there are better technologies here and now for nuclear power that eschew the old technologies that are, more or less, 1950's technology. Ever hear of a pebble-bed reactor? Of course not. It's meltdown proof. Used one third the fuel of a conventional reactor, uses helium gas as an agitator. Looks like a gumball machine. Helium gas stops the balls from circulating, reaction stops, end of story. The spent fuel is also easier to dispose of, even though there is more of it. The West Germans pooped around with idea in the 80's and a little bit of a mishap when a ball got stuck. Oops. The technology may have caught up with it, but the science behind it is sound. (<----this is an oversimplification, but oh well... look it up yourself for the whole history of the thing) There was a fascinating wikipedia (yeah, i know... wikipedia, right? Meh, it's a place to start the trip) article about operating nuclear power reactors in the US and ones that have been decommissioned.

Have any links to this stuff? I'd love to get more educated on nuclear power. I looked up pebble-bed. Fascinating stuff

Very cool

Posted by Samurai the Japanese catastrophe was part bad planning, part mismanagement and part bad luck. The Japanese should've known better than to build a reactor where they did. It was just a matter of time before the sea stepped in and gave it the big fuck you. I used to live not even three miles from Watts Bar Nuclear One when I lived in Evensville, TN. That was about 30 miles from Sequoyah Nuclear in Soddy-Daisy,TN... To be honest, it never bothered me. The thing with nuclear power is that there are better technologies here and now for nuclear power that eschew the old technologies that are, more or less, 1950's technology. Ever hear of a pebble-bed reactor? Of course not. It's meltdown proof. Used one third the fuel of a conventional reactor, uses helium gas as an agitator. Looks like a gumball machine. Helium gas stops the balls from circulating, reaction stops, end of story. The spent fuel is also easier to dispose of, even though there is more of it. The West Germans pooped around with idea in the 80's and a little bit of a mishap when a ball got stuck. Oops. The technology may have caught up with it, but the science behind it is sound. (<----this is an oversimplification, but oh well... look it up yourself for the whole history of the thing) There was a fascinating wikipedia (yeah, i know... wikipedia, right? Meh, it's a place to start the trip) article about operating nuclear power reactors in the US and ones that have been decommissioned.

Oh yes I know what PBMR is! This kind of reactors was being developed in Russia back in soviet times as well. You may have heard of the GT-MHR -- it is also gas cooled with coated fuel particles in compacts rather than spheres and a prismatic core instead of a pebble bed core. Anyway, gas-cooled reactors are still mostly paperwork.

Posted by tranqfx Have any links to this stuff? I'd love to get more educated on nuclear power. I looked up pebble-bed. Fascinating stuff

http://en.wikipedi...ized_water_reactor
http://en.wikipedi...ling_water_reactor
http://www.uxc.com...il.aspx?key=GT-MHR
http://en.wikipedi...st-neutron_reactor
http://en.wikipedi...ooled_fast_reactor

What I last heard about Fukushima Unit 1 is that it was at its final stage before decommissioning. For Unit 1, nobody wanted to build an anti-tsunami wall that other power units and nuclear stations had.
Note that the accident destroyed only power unit 1. According to calculations, the probability of such large tsunami for Fukushima Unit 1 was one in thousand years -- that is almost equal to zero! Why build a wall?

And the Westinghouse BWR design has only 45 minutes before the core meltdown starts without core cooling! No passive safety features... It means: no electricity -- no shutdown.