SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Sioux Nation
DJT 13.90+1.7%Jan 16 3:59 PM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: stockman_scott who wrote (205643)3/15/2011 5:17:42 AM
From: SiouxPal  Read Replies (4) of 362386
 
Correct sir. I do not know of the architecture of Japans' reactor facilities. Do know of Floridas'.
In simple terms our current reactors have redundant backups.
When the pundits say "They even are using sea water to cool the rods" I just have to smile. Sea water is what we use to begin with.
That's why power plants locate near the Gulf, and Atlantic and Pacific oceans. (They do not use fresh water to use in their containment buildings)
Never have I think. Been in that business as a vendor for 42 years.)
I had a rather high clearance rating at Crystal River's nuke facility.
Walked all over their piping above ground in the dome.
A power plant has two main materials in them. Concrete and piping with accessory components.
They sincerely are not rocket science.

I have also toured the VAB at Kennedy Space Center.
(That's the tall building when our space rockets are assembled prior to launch.) Pad 19 has been the launch pad for the majority of launches.
They take the launch rockets, sometimes with Endeavor and the others out to the pad on enormous rail tracks. Maybe three feet per three seconds.
Americas current nuclear plants have evolved over about 42 years.
They are marvels, but far overpriced. I know that because I have sold them components that ended up on the moon.
NASA, and their support vendors, Martin Marietta, General Dynamics, and others paid us list price for their hardware.
In other words we killed a hog as vendors.
It was a "Given".
Back then their security was not like today with terrorism.
May sound funky, but just true.
Their security was in their "destructive testing" of parts.
They may buy 20 pricey fittings to use just one on spacecraft etc.

Our power plants have redundancy.
Our containment buildings have so many redundant features that workers there are happy to be employed there.
Nobody worries.
Some fun fictional movies about "meltdowns" are cause of fun flicks.
Japan's designs I know zippo about.
Our concerns of burial grounds of spent nuclear fuel does not compare to the deaths from alternative power sources.
All of our spent fuel rods can either be reused for less traumatic uses or buried so doggone well encapsulated in forms of shells as to be the threat of a Condor grabbing your baby from your tent while camping.
Deaths from coal mining are exponentially higher as a comparison.
My constant argument against nuclear power remains the COST of construction and maintenance. Therein lies the corruption.
Manatees here in Florida live in the warm seawater effluent.
They need it during winters.
They huddle around it.
If I've goofed up anywhere during this post I blame beer.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News