Jose Ceralde
27 Feb 2010

Edwin,
 my friend, you have missed the point of all the SP posters and the master puncher editorial.

I for one am not questioning the safety of nuclear power having said in my previous post as having lived in nuclear ships. But the US Navy ships I was on had a strict command and control protocol. It had gone thru a comprehensive program planning prior to being put in commission. The safety protocols had been written unlike what we heard from the operators of the San Roque Dam, which had none according to their testimony in Congress.

In the nuclear power plants of the countries you mentioned you conveniently did not say the state of the unsafe plants that are scheduled to be deactivated due to older system designs and can no longer be repaired. In most complicated systems, we have what we call a level of repair analysis (LORA) wherein we test almost all the components prior to failure. That way we know when we likely would call the system unsafe. Since most early nuclear plants could not be tested this way because of the expense and unavailability of these components, a best engineering guess most likely is what they went by during the deactivation of these plants. Thus in US, Japan, and even Korea you just gave the board the green light to, are plants that need expensive checks to continue operating.

For every new plant being built today if you do your research you would find a lot more being deactivated for safety. Most likely there is already a paper trail why your Korean plant needs to be deactivated yet now being sold to you with all the expense… to make it safe for your karaoke needs?

There is a time to cheer lead and sing your Karaoke but not now when the people need you to be critical because the other poster said “this is a path to HELL.”

Back to Homepage

Share your Comments or Reactions

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments