You are partially correct. They will keep their mouth shut and use discretion to prevent those who are completely unqualified from harming students with unscientific lies. If you were in the blacksmithing business, and a man with no arms applied to be your apprentice, would you hire him? No, because he is simply incapable of doing the job. Similarly, creationists are incapable of teaching in any scientific field. They aren't scientists, and have thrown away the process that lets real science take place. This haws nothing to do with their belief in God, and everything to do with their lack of important qualifications.
Are you thinking that we were both suggesting they go put a sterling engine in there NOW?!? How dumb do you think we are? Don't answer that... we were asking why nobody thought to use a sterling engine to power emergency pumps in the first place. Sheesh.
What bullshit. Why do some people claim that when corporations cut corners, they pass the savings on to the consumer? You KNOW that isn't true. As for putting things away from the ocean, if they can engineer a containment unit to withstand an earthquake, they can engineer a pipe. If they can engineer a spent fuel holding tank to withstand an earthquake, they can engineer a spare water tank. And if they HAVE to put things next to the ocean, they can still put the backup generator up a hill, out of reach of the tsunami. Engineers were telling them this was unsafe. The bean counters ignored them.
Nobody expects a risk free solution. What we do expect is for them to follow safety regulations, and to refrain from cutting corners on safety, and then lying about it. Keep reading the other posts here. There is a lot of good information explaining, in detail, just how the corporate sociopaths earned their huge bonuses.
You see, I want nuclear power. We can make it cheaper and safer than anything else we know of right now. Except the corporate fuckwads ruined that dream by cutting corners and putting profits (not consumer costs) over safety, giving the environmentalists ammunition in their misguided quest to destroy nuclear power. And you, you clever little cheerleader, are bending over and hiking up your pretty little skirt for them. Thanks for helping destroy nuclear power, asshole.
Wow, you really got schooled here, didn't you? Did you read all those replies pointing out how very wrong you are? Did you read the two posts pointing out how bad TEPCO really is? I wonder because you seem very certain of your position in this post, but you quite obviously are not working with full information. Personally, when I learn new information that exposes my own ignorance or incorrectness, I update my position to reflect my new understanding of reality. But you haven't responded to any of the people who responded to you. Which leads me to believe you haven't learned anything from your schooling here. Which is kinda sad.
You have just demonstrated that you do not understand the difference between a sterling engine and a steam turbine, so I will point you to Wikipedia, where you can remedy your lack of education.
Hopefully that should be enough for you to understand why a sterling engine sized to run the emergency cooling pumps will work off the decay heat, while a full sized steam turbine designed to produce electricity would not.
Exactly my point, thank you. They cut corners. The coastline there is very steep, had they situated it a couple kilometers inland and built a big pipe to the ocean, built a bigger cooling pond for spent fuel, and put the backup generator above the known average tsunami height, this all would have cost more. Shareholders wouldn't have made as much of a profit. And we wouldn't be having this conversation because this never would have happened.
Okay, so the plant was designed by GE, and some of the reactors were built by GE. Are you disputing the claims of the GE three? Are you saying these reactors were as safe as they could have been? Not that I am excluding anyone from blame, ten meter tsunamis hit Japan all the freaking time. They should never have built this thing on the coast. They did so to increase profits, and the people responsible for that decision will never face censure, let alone prosecution. Welcome to our world of two tier justice. If you kill a man, you go to jail, but if they kill a thousand, they get a bonus.
And yet, in a region known for frequent ten meter tsunamis, the last one in 1993, they built the backup generator directly at sea level, on the coast, and designed it to withstand a five meter tsunami. Maybe because it was cheaper to do it that way. If you are the CEO who decides to do something like this, and people die, you will not face prosecution. But if you don't make your shareholders rich next quarter, you WILL be out of a job. It doesn't take genius insight into human nature to tell what will happen, given those incentives.
You do know this plant was built by GE, right? And that three engineers quite in protest over the unsafe design? Excuse me if I'm not concerned about insulting an American megacorporation.
The hysteria, in this case, is mere venting of fears, while the rebuttal is saying "your fears are stupid. Stop having them." I'm not sure if you are married to a woman, but if you are, you should understand why that is a very dumb thing to say, especially when it is true.
Do you know how often tsunamis larger than five meters hit the coast of Japan? Anyone who lives there could tell you the last time a tsunami this size or larger hit, a ten meter tsunami hit Okushiri in 1993, and before that, another ten meter tsunami hit Wajima in 1983. I'm not criticizing Japan, per se, I am criticizing the cost cutting tendencies of the nuclear industry, which could have a perfect safety record if they cared to.
Face it, they cut corners to make more of a profit. And talk about stupid, tsunamis happen all the time in Japan, this was built "after the fact." Are you seriously surprised that there was a tsunami of this size in Japan? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historic_tsunamis
Face it, tsunami heights top five meters almost all the time.
Slashdot Mirror
You are partially correct. They will keep their mouth shut and use discretion to prevent those who are completely unqualified from harming students with unscientific lies. If you were in the blacksmithing business, and a man with no arms applied to be your apprentice, would you hire him? No, because he is simply incapable of doing the job. Similarly, creationists are incapable of teaching in any scientific field. They aren't scientists, and have thrown away the process that lets real science take place. This haws nothing to do with their belief in God, and everything to do with their lack of important qualifications.
It is discrimination against tuna. You should say, "the applicant punched a tuna, do not hire" to cover your ass completely.
Sure they can, they just can't call say why. "Applicant smelled like bad tuna. Do not hire."
Are you thinking that we were both suggesting they go put a sterling engine in there NOW?!? How dumb do you think we are? Don't answer that... we were asking why nobody thought to use a sterling engine to power emergency pumps in the first place. Sheesh.
I guess I'm just the straight man for this series of jokes. I set 'em up, you knock 'em out of the park. Sigh
What bullshit. Why do some people claim that when corporations cut corners, they pass the savings on to the consumer? You KNOW that isn't true. As for putting things away from the ocean, if they can engineer a containment unit to withstand an earthquake, they can engineer a pipe. If they can engineer a spent fuel holding tank to withstand an earthquake, they can engineer a spare water tank. And if they HAVE to put things next to the ocean, they can still put the backup generator up a hill, out of reach of the tsunami. Engineers were telling them this was unsafe. The bean counters ignored them.
Nobody expects a risk free solution. What we do expect is for them to follow safety regulations, and to refrain from cutting corners on safety, and then lying about it. Keep reading the other posts here. There is a lot of good information explaining, in detail, just how the corporate sociopaths earned their huge bonuses.
You see, I want nuclear power. We can make it cheaper and safer than anything else we know of right now. Except the corporate fuckwads ruined that dream by cutting corners and putting profits (not consumer costs) over safety, giving the environmentalists ammunition in their misguided quest to destroy nuclear power. And you, you clever little cheerleader, are bending over and hiking up your pretty little skirt for them. Thanks for helping destroy nuclear power, asshole.
Wow, you really got schooled here, didn't you? Did you read all those replies pointing out how very wrong you are? Did you read the two posts pointing out how bad TEPCO really is? I wonder because you seem very certain of your position in this post, but you quite obviously are not working with full information. Personally, when I learn new information that exposes my own ignorance or incorrectness, I update my position to reflect my new understanding of reality. But you haven't responded to any of the people who responded to you. Which leads me to believe you haven't learned anything from your schooling here. Which is kinda sad.
You have just demonstrated that you do not understand the difference between a sterling engine and a steam turbine, so I will point you to Wikipedia, where you can remedy your lack of education.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sterling_engine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steam_turbine
Or perhaps you do not understand just how hot things remain when a reactor is shut down.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decay_heat
Hopefully that should be enough for you to understand why a sterling engine sized to run the emergency cooling pumps will work off the decay heat, while a full sized steam turbine designed to produce electricity would not.
Exactly my point, thank you. They cut corners. The coastline there is very steep, had they situated it a couple kilometers inland and built a big pipe to the ocean, built a bigger cooling pond for spent fuel, and put the backup generator above the known average tsunami height, this all would have cost more. Shareholders wouldn't have made as much of a profit. And we wouldn't be having this conversation because this never would have happened.
Okay, so the plant was designed by GE, and some of the reactors were built by GE. Are you disputing the claims of the GE three? Are you saying these reactors were as safe as they could have been? Not that I am excluding anyone from blame, ten meter tsunamis hit Japan all the freaking time. They should never have built this thing on the coast. They did so to increase profits, and the people responsible for that decision will never face censure, let alone prosecution. Welcome to our world of two tier justice. If you kill a man, you go to jail, but if they kill a thousand, they get a bonus.
Yes, let's move to safe, clean, non-radioactive coal... wait a second...
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste
And yet, in a region known for frequent ten meter tsunamis, the last one in 1993, they built the backup generator directly at sea level, on the coast, and designed it to withstand a five meter tsunami. Maybe because it was cheaper to do it that way. If you are the CEO who decides to do something like this, and people die, you will not face prosecution. But if you don't make your shareholders rich next quarter, you WILL be out of a job. It doesn't take genius insight into human nature to tell what will happen, given those incentives.
Then don't build it on the coast! And listen when your engineers tell you it isn't safe: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GE_Three
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GE_Three
You do know this plant was built by GE, right? And that three engineers quite in protest over the unsafe design? Excuse me if I'm not concerned about insulting an American megacorporation.
The hysteria, in this case, is mere venting of fears, while the rebuttal is saying "your fears are stupid. Stop having them." I'm not sure if you are married to a woman, but if you are, you should understand why that is a very dumb thing to say, especially when it is true.
Do you know how often tsunamis larger than five meters hit the coast of Japan? Anyone who lives there could tell you the last time a tsunami this size or larger hit, a ten meter tsunami hit Okushiri in 1993, and before that, another ten meter tsunami hit Wajima in 1983. I'm not criticizing Japan, per se, I am criticizing the cost cutting tendencies of the nuclear industry, which could have a perfect safety record if they cared to.
Damn it, how could I have missed that?
Face it, they cut corners to make more of a profit. And talk about stupid, tsunamis happen all the time in Japan, this was built "after the fact." Are you seriously surprised that there was a tsunami of this size in Japan? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historic_tsunamis
Face it, tsunami heights top five meters almost all the time.
which seeeaaaatt can i taaaake?
Depends on what day it is.
Damn sexy emoticons, if they don't want the attention they shouldn't dress in such slutty ASCII.
I know enough not to build a nuclear plant on a tsunami prone coast that can't be protected by walls.
Ahahahahahaha YES! Fucking awesome. Thank you so much, it's been fun. You don't even know why you lost, do you?
http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tjernobyl
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar
Game over.
In the candy cave imagination runs so free,
It's so obvious that you're a bot too!
So, Charlie, please will you go into the cave?