The Case for Nuclear Energy Message Board

STOCKTALK

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.

Pastimes : The Case for Nuclear Energy

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: HPilot who wrote (224)	3/17/2011 11:06:59 AM
From: Hawkmoon	of 312

I am not sure there was a place secure enough for the Tsunami. Oh.. I'm not so sure about that.. Placing the generators in reinforced open roof buildings of two stories in height would have seemed sufficient, IMO. The waters would have flowed around the buildings. But I don't have a sense that they took at steps to safeguard the generators to bear the brunt of a tsunami. It's all 20/20 hindsight, but if they are going to "harden" the reactors to handle a 7.8, if not the actual 9.0, it would make sense that secondary systems should have the same consideration. I bet the plant engineers have received a severe "reality slap" and should be taking steps now to prevent a similar situation in the US, Europe, and Canada. Hawk

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next