as promised, a quote specific response to textbook quotes: In order for any [safety] barrier to be breached, the system must first become overheated. There are two possible ways for this to occur. The fission rate may grow too rapidly for the coolant to remove all of the energy being created, or the coolant system may fail.
the second possibility is the one that i have been posting the legitimate and voiced LWR watchdog group concerns about regarding y2k induced problems as well as the LACK of EDG contingency planning installations in every single USA LWR installation of power generating reactors.
it is also the area that the NRC is delaying making a decision upon, that could affect negatively so very many lives post 01/01/00, at extremely high cost in human suffering and fatalities.
there are NO BACKUP DIESEL GENERATORS, PROPANE GENERATORS, HAND CRANKED DYNAMOS or any other such contingency system to run a failed LWR cooling pool system NOW, let alone post y2k.
my previously posted responses to you have been largely ignored since you felt you so successfully quoted your textbooks and everyone nervously laughed in some false sense of relief, except me, of course, as i find it appalling that there is no such contingency power sourcing for operating the cooling system pool.
the failure per week of the 'regular' backup generators ---which I already posted through July 27---presumably to keep power to the control room lights on and control panels lit, by and large have failed their y2k tests on 40% of the US LWR installations. there have been no reassuring secondary tests announced where said EDG's have performed flawlessly, either. WHY NOT?
what in the world are we, the most powerful nation in the LWR world, doing with NO backup generators to power/run the cooling system stressed by y2k failures or embedded chip horrors?
logic would suggest that one possibility is that Emergency Diesel Generators the size of locomotives possibly aren't even big enough to do the cooling pool circulating job. do we need union pacific to 'volunteer 4 per LWR installation?' would 8 do it?
would appreciate a quotation or two from your textbooks or trade rags that deal with the contingency plans currently in place for cooling system failure.
here's your chance to dig out more dusty texts, jim. i did appreciate your bibliography recitative.
regarding your other question as to why i thought it possible you would edit your profile to reflect something other than your successful completion of and receipt of a nuclear physics degree from a legit university:
wouldn't have anything to do with the first line of your reply post where you categorically pedantically declared "i'm not a nuclear physicist."
something odd about a fellow who has a degree in NP, and has obviously kept his texts in some reachable enclave library claiming he is NOT a nuclear physicist.
i remember a democratic ex-president with a nuclear physics degree who wasn't bashful or made such immodest protestations.
about as silly as Bach swearing he wasn't an organist.
oh, and about your silly client stating it was just a printout problem with software in the power down situation in the stressed sections of the UK:
reminds me of c.k.houston's first post on this thread:
where she stated:
5% embedded systems will fail - which 5%? ... No one
knows.
25 billion of them out there. Electrical engineers need to fix - NOT
programmers.
EACH has to be tested or changed-out ... individually ... one by one!!
UK story plainly stated that it needed engineers to fix each individual keyed installation in 25% of the failure instances.
as i recall one of the thrusts of the UK lights out story: remember the section where "everyone was trying to stay alert/awake for the knock from the utility company's ENGINEER to come tinker/replace/reset their individual meter on the house/building in 25% of the cases of power failure."
Oh, and that 25% failure number is a TAD higher than c.k.houston's 5% number now isn't it? [go jeff mizer!!!]
maybe your client would be kind enough to inform the utility company that all they had to dispatch was an army of highschool hacker geeks to get all those poor consumers back up with their 'soft touch' skills.
cheeeeerio and rots of ruck. i look forward to more quotations from those dusty texts. heck, i'll even click through on an appropriate link you might provide, since it is obvious you never clicked through on the 3 i provided in my rebuttal post.
do you really think the government of canada doesn't know by now where you are, with your classical training background, and that you might be more useful glowing in the dark than tweaking accounting systems in the next, oh, 140 some odd days?? |
