oh come on this was done way back in the 70s wasn’t it .... not that i’m an immelt fan (fart in his general direction)but he wasnt even barely out of college if that.
I trust almost nothing that the NYT prints (and truth be known, I think they are at a much higher scum level than GE). I am concerned that there is a movement afoot in the liberal community to "punish" the nuclear industry. The NYT is publishing articles like this to get the public in the mood to "slam" the nuclear industry.
Remember, this happened to the banking industry less than a year ago. We are still reeling by the NYT led mis-information campaign.
It’s amazing that both the Japan nuclear reactor problem and Katrina inundating New Orleans stem from the exact same design flaw.
Emergency Generators!
In Katrina’s case the huge generators needed to power the massive pumps to pump out the below sea- level city were placed near sea level, so the hurricane driven seawater overran the generators, disabling the massive pumps. The same thing happened to a New Orleans hospital as the ground level emergency generator was flooded out.
In the Japanese nuclear case, all reactors in the plant automatically shut down perfectly during the earthquake, yet the minute’s later tsunami overran the emergency generators, killing emergency electrical power needed to run coolant water into the already shut down reactors.
It’s the same simple engineering problem – emergency generators- and their fuel tanks- sited too low to the anticipated sea level.
We don’t have an unsafe nuclear technology; we have an emergency generator location problem.
It isn’t as if Emergency response plans and staff have not been available.
If coal miners can be dug out of a mine nearly a mile deep on short order, why isn’t there more wherewithal to go into the nuclear plant and bring it under control?
The big lesson to learn here, is that consolidating all emergency response in the hands of a few is not a winning solution.
............General Electric is such a corrupt, disgusting Obama company..............................
Before you revile GE for all the Japanese problems, you’d best check who provided the design and equipments for each one of the reactors on site!
“General Electric is such a corrupt, disgusting Obama company and propagandists. I hope they are sued for tens of billions for their corruption, SHODDY engineering and dishonesty. GE is a scum company.”
Your ignorance is breathtaking. The GE that built that reactor is not the GE of Immelt, in fact it was even before the days of Jack Welch, and Obama was just a kid.
Not only that, the reactor was built to withstand an 8.3 quake, not a 9.0 AND a devastating tsunami. The fact that it’s still standing it’s a tribute to how well it was built.
You’d look less of a fool if you informed yourself first.
Ping to me for later. GE may not be primarily negligent here, but this event, rightly of wrongly, casts doubt on the GE brand in a very high-stakes and competitive market.
Nope, sorry to disagree.
There was a certain level of risk the Japanese authority assumed at the time in directing the engineering of the reactor, containment, and back-up systems.
Reiterate one more time...does one plan for a 100 year event, 1000 year event, or a million year event? Most plans I’ve ever seen require the 100 year event included as the speck of the design. This event was bigger than a 100 year event.
You get anything that exceeds the designed specs. it becomes an act of God...sh*t hit the fan....
The reality is if the tsunami had been the planned 7 meter event, none of this would be happening. The reactor would be performing beyond design specifications.
So the question remains for over-reacting folks...what level do you regulate too? What risk level do you accept?
It is a double edged sword right now. Forty years ago this natural disaster event in Japan would have likely resulted in the loss of life far beyond what they are today. Building designs etc. have vastly improved since then and that makes this that much more heartbreaking.
What had not been upgraded to keep up with modern expectations? Again, the risk managers would have only been considering the 100 year event horizon, even though more lives would be saved through modern building design. The risk levels changed and actually increased from a 1 in 100 years to a 40 in 100 years and more lives are in play. Japan had just authorized a 12 year extension on these designs. They were taking on over a 52% risk level or higher.
But...if the ‘event’ occurs...it is an act of God. At what point though is it no longer an act of God? GE wasn’t and isn’t responsible for the Japanese assumed risk.
Many of these plants were built knowing there were disposal issues too. Scientists and designers at the time figured we would have resolved that issue by now. We have not.
Many plants around the world reprocess or send their fuel for reprocessing keeping the cooling ponds at lower spent fuel storage levels lower. The United States banned reprocessing. Many of our spent fuel pools are near or are at capacity.
At what risk?