GE made 23 sister reactors in the U.S. using the Japanese design

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-05-2011
GE made 23 sister reactors in the U.S. using the Japanese design
63
Sun, 03-13-2011 - 7:56pm

The following story indicates G.E. made 23 reactors in the U.S. using a design similar to that of those currently failing in Japan.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009

Anybody who remembers studying the periodic table of elements would be wary of ANY nuclear power generation being labeled "safe" or "clean", regardless of design or manufacturer.

Jabberwocka

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-05-2011
True, but thorium or boron reactors don't get hot enough to explode or melt down. They are low energy compared to traditional uranium reactors. The technology to make these is relatively new. Helium as coolant is also new, the advantage is a breach would release an element that would float toward the sky instead of into our water table. The two may not work together.

I hope our government does a review of the reactors which have a design similar to the units that failed in Japan.
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-11-2005

Not sure where your from. But I grew up in the Tri-Cities WA. That is 26 miles down wind of the Hanford Nuclear Reservation. I'm proud to say I'm from the place that HELP stop WW11.

~~Sam stitches well with others, runs with scissors in her pocket. Cheerful and stupid.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
Helium might float up into the atmosphere but depending on atmospheric conditions (high winds, precipitation in the form of snow or rain), a helium coolant escape wouldn't necessarily make any radioactive release "safe". In a "perfect storm" scenario, radioactivity could still make its way into the water cycle.

And there's still the nasty little business of how to safely dispose of waste products with half lives in the thousands of years. Proposals to bury them in places like Yucca Mountain or the salt caverns adjacent to Carlsbad reek to high heaven of short sightedness.

Jabberwocka

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-05-2011
We mine radioactive uranium sometimes from deep mines. We may wish to recycle those mines for our radioactive waste. France seems to recycle a high percentage of their waste, what they can't recycle gets stored. Maybe we can store what can't be recycled in the mines the radiation came from at a level of radiation similar to that which was there naturally.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009

Burying radioactive waste presumes that geologic activity is nil at the burial site and will stay that way, over thousands of years.

Jabberwocka

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-07-2002
I don't like nuclear power. I don't trust it. Maybe it's because I live in the PNW - an area subject to earthquakes & volcanoes. Even though it's closed down, I shudder every time I see the nuclear tower near Chehalis (right off of Interstate 5). I'd feel much safer if those facilities didn't exist at all!

 nwtreehugger  

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-01-2008

It's sad to see that it takes thousands of people dying to "perhaps" change the mind of our government to stop building nuclear plants. Seems like everybody has short term memory these days. I'm ashamed that our government looks the other way and builds things, just because it's convenient, knowing the dangers it could inflict on American lives.

Lets not forget that they are still building new under water oil rigs... Why do we put up with this? How can we stop this nonsense?

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-11-2005

You do realize that WPPS#2 is online.Seattle gets power from it

~~Sam stitches well with others, runs with scissors in her pocket. Cheerful and stupid.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
I'm no fan either. Seems to me that the global warming issue has made the nuclear industry look more appealing since there are no combustion products. True enough but it's bizarre to see the claims of "safe" or "clean" given the toxicity of radioactive elements and the span of time for which they remain lethal.

Jabberwocka

Pages