[Vision2020] Well Chuck, Here We Go Again

[Art Deco]

We do not know either the short term or long term effects of this Japanese
nuclear disaster yet, especially the long term effects of the radiation
leaked.  Chuck Kovis is right on target about his concerns.  Of particular
concern is the mutations in sea life and their eventual consequences
globally on the oceanic environment and consequently on the food chain that
sustains much of life on earth.  The huge barrage of flotsam approaching
our coast (now about 300 miles off the coast of Canada) is at this time
another unknown in the amount and effect of radiation.

I have been in systems since the late 1960's.  In my opinion there is no
such thing as a fail-safe system or a perfectly secure system.  If one
wanted to spend a lot of time, I think both of these opinions could be
proven in a proof analogous to Godel's Proof.  There is no way to eliminate
human error or duplicity whether in design or operation.  There is no way
to prove that any design has provided for all possible conditions, since
there is yet to be designed any large system which did not create new,
unforeseen conditions.  There is no way to correctly predict the force of
future natural disasters, as you illustrated in your comments below.

The consequences of unconsidered, unimagined, or incorrectly predicted
errors in the design, construction, and operation of a nuclear power plant,
and the disposal of waste from that plant are are a risk, in my opinion,
that do not justify the expected reward.  I am skeptical for reasons given
above of any engineer's claim about ultimate safety of nuclear power as
compared to other methods of energy production.

You and I are not likely to contribute to the debate about whether nuclear
is the only way to go.  In the 1980's I spent considerable time and effort
on this problem.  Things have changed since them, but I still believe that
a combination of solar energy, other alternate sources, energy efficient
designs, and conservation is the most sensible and safest way to go.  Add a
rigorous global program of birth control to this to reduce the demand for
power (and many other resources soon to become scarce).

w.

On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 6:15 PM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com>wrote:

> **
>
> While TEPCO's handling of the situation was atrocious, I would also like
> to point out that the Fukushima Daichi plant withstood a 9.0 earthquake
> followed by 40ft waves, which were more than twice as high as their sea
> wall was built to withstand.  It was an act of God (don't mean that
> literally) that was far on the outside of what they even thought was
> possible in terms of likely occurrences.
>
> I've only been able to find references to three deaths directly attributed
> to the Fukushima disaster.  Two of them occurred during the earthquake and
> tsunami, and one worker who was in his 60's died of a sudden illness when
> cleaning around the reactors, but they are unsure if it's radiation-related
> because he was exposed to about as much radiation as a chest x-ray.
>
> Anyway, compare and contrast to the coal mine fire that has been burning
> underground for 50 years under Centralia, Pennsylvania.  That wasn't caused
> by a natural disaster of epic proportions, it was caused by someone
> throwing some hot ash in a landfill that didn't have a fire-resistant clay
> barrier that was up-to-date.  The fire is still burning today.
>
> I just hate to see this incident used as the poster boy for the
> anti-nuclear crowd.  Sure, if they'd doubled the height of the sea wall, or
> had moved the emergency generator to higher ground instead of trusting the
> sea walls to hold, the disaster might have been mostly diverted.  This
> wasn't a Chernobyl, where human error was the main cause of the disaster.
>
> That having been said, there are newer designs out there that they need to
> expedite testing on to ensure that even this level of a disaster won't
> cause a containment breach.
>
> If we want to get off of oil and coal any time soon, nuclear is the only
> real way to go.  Eventually, they'll solve the energy storage problems and
> make intermittent alternative energy sources more viable.  In the meantime,
> though, nuclear is the only way to go for alternative base-load
> generation.  Well, and hydro, but there are only so many rivers we can dam
> up.
>
> Paul
>
>
> On 03/27/2012 08:37 AM, Art Deco wrote:
>
>
>  Probe at Japan's crippled nuke plant finds fatal radiation levels
>
>  Published March 27, 2012 | Associated Press
>
> advertisement
>
> A new probe at Japan's crippled nuclear power plant has found fatal
> radiation levels and hardly any cooling water inside one of the reactors,
> renewing concerns about the plant's stability.
>
> The operator of the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant says an endoscopic
> examination Tuesday detected radiation levels up to 10 times the fatal dose
> inside the No. 2 reactor's contain chamber, suggesting challenges ahead in
> shutting down the facility.
>
> The probe also found the containment vessel had cooling water up to only
> about 2 feet from the bottom, far below the yards estimated when the
> government declared the plant's stability in December.
>
> Plant workers also reported fresh leaks of contaminated water from a water
> treatment unit, some flowing into the ocean.
>
>
> http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/03/27/probe-at-japans-crippled-nuke-plant-finds-fatal-radiation-levels/
>
> --
> Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)
> art.deco.studios at gmail.com
>
>
> =======================================================
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com <Vision2020 at moscow.com>
> =======================================================
>
>
>


-- 
Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)
art.deco.studios at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20120327/be7fb746/attachment-0001.html>