Why Nuclear Must Be Part Of The Energy Solution (2018)

Re:Why Nuclear Must Be Part Of The Energy Solution (2018) by corty on Monday March 01, 2021 @05:33AM (#26301412)

You still have to remember that the Fukushima reactors were also old and crappy designs. That TMI was as harmless as it was came from the things we learned, Fukushima predates that. Tepco also refused to upgrade or improve several safety measures.

And the Czernobyl design not only ignored a lot of safety knowledge the Sowjets had at that time, but took intentional shortcuts to be cheaper and make the fuel more accessible (supposedly for bomb production).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why Nuclear Must Be Part Of The Energy Solution (2018) by ketzu on Monday March 01, 2021 @06:37AM (#26301769)

> You still have to remember that the Fukushima reactors were also old and crappy designs.

This is only comforting if we stopped operating "old and crappy" reactors. But overall, your comment seems to agree with my point, as you wrote:

> Tepco also refused to upgrade or improve several safety measures.

> ignored a lot of safety knowledge the Sowjets had at that time, but took intentional shortcuts to be cheaper and make the fuel more accessible

This the point I tried(, but not neccesarily succeded) to make: We should expect this kind of corner cutting and underfunding.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why Nuclear Must Be Part Of The Energy Solution (2018) by corty on Monday March 01, 2021 @07:02AM (#26301917)

Yes, I agree completely. Nuclear can be safe and sensible, but we do need to get rid of a bunch of old crap first.

[ Parent | on HN ]