Slashdot Mirror

--

Well, the problems aren't even just "all at once," since that implies that they are brief.

Around Chernobyl, things are still so far out of whack that they may not recover. We still don't know what the overall effects will be, and new things are still popping up with regularity.

If you'd like more information about it all, here's a good link to follow.

So it isn't just a bad accident, it is a monstrous box of unknowns that can ruin unknown generations of humanity as a result of human mistakes.

2 coal plants to replace the failed Chernobyl one emit 10.4 tons of uranium and 25.6 tons of thorium, and a total of 34,200 millicuries (34 curies) of radiation per year. So operating for a million years they would emit 34 million curies.

8 tons of Chernobyl fuel was blasted out of the plant, in addition to radioactive gas leaks. "Several million curies" to "50 million curies" were released.

2 coal plants to replace the failed Chernobyl one emit 10.4 tons of uranium and 25.6 tons of thorium, and a total of 34,200 millicuries (34 curies) of radiation per year. So operating for a million years they would emit 34 million curies.

8 tons of Chernobyl fuel was blasted out of the plant, in addition to radioactive gas leaks. "Several million curies" to "50 million curies" were released.

According to this page: http://www.uilondon.org/sym/1998/pa ulu is.htm

Uranium reserves that are cost-effective to mine will be enough to supply for around forty years. This is assuming that demand stays constant. Demand for nuclear power may well do that, but power demands in general tend to rise in a geometric fashion.

But there exists today a perfect nuclear reactor. It's clean, no waste, basically never needs refuelling. It produces more power than we'll be needing in a long, long time. If you want to check it out, look up next time you're outside when it's not cloudy.

How to capture that power is another matter. Current solar cell tech is somewhat lacking. But the energy is there, we just need to go fetch it. (Don't use figures of how much energy the sun puts into the Earth here. Obviously we would be collecting from space at some point or another.)

"Intel will also be offering it's new, jointly developed, industrial strength power supply for ISPs using large scale P4 systems"

"Earlier today, seven intel engineers were incinertated in a systems-test accident. The incident occurred on power-up of the test-bed of Intel's new quad-P4 board, codenamed Phoenix. Witnesses describe the cause as 'spontaneous combustion'. 'The damn thing just blew', said one engineer, 'and then everything was just a ball of fire! I'm sure glad I got out of there alive... Sources report that Intel management has reportedly been talking to executives at Frigidaire regarding the incident."

Some quotes:

"World reserves of uranium are more than adequate to satisfy reactor requirements to well beyond 2020."

That's not very reassuring. Fortunately, after stretching it by allowing higher prices for the mining of uranium, the following is stated:

"Given the relatively low impact of the uranium cost on nuclear power economics, the ultimate potential supply base is comparable to those of other energy commodities, in excess of 100 years. "

That sounds about the same as what I said.

Ok, your post was full of misinformation but that statement was by far the most obviously wrong

How about explaining why it is "obviously" wrong? Can you give a reference to a study that claims that there is enough uranium for 200 years, 300 years, etc.?

Futhermore, what is the rest of the "misinformation"?

No, I mean steam explosion. They removed too many control rods for a test, which allowed the reactor to got so hot that it the water surrounding it turned to steam and exploded. Since there was no containment vessel, the explosion threw fuel everywhere and made a big radioactive mess. Check this page http://www.uilondon.org/cherntim.htm to see a breakdown of the events. The explosion is described at the very end.

Graphite was used as a moderator. The control rods were boron carbide, most were inserted from the top of the reactor. The fuel assemblies were inside water-filled pressure tubes. The reactor core was contained in a concrete line cavity with a steel cap.

The main problem with the reactor design was that it was unstable at low power levels. Steam bubbles would result in increased power output, creating more steam bubbles. The control rods also displaced water from the lower part of the reactor core as they were inserted, which increased the power output.