Sandy slows US nuclear plants, oldest in US declares alert: morning-after update


10 Responses to “Sandy slows US nuclear plants, oldest in US declares alert: morning-after update”

  1. Tavie says:

    Dear lord, don’t let my boyfriend read this one. He frequents some conspiracy-theory forum and someone posted “Sandy’s gonna get nuked on Tuesday, say goodbye” or something equally preposterous and he’s been freaking out… *facepalm*

  2. Anthony B says:

    Aftermath of major disaster, a nuclear power plant says “oh, we’re having some cooling issues, but no need to worry, it’s all fine.” OK cool, this hasn’t happened before, what could go wrong?

  3. awjt says:

    They won’t ever admit there’s a problem until AFTER it happens.  That’s because their corporate bottom line demands lying to the public, and therefore the stockholders, until it’s incontrovertible there is a disaster that has already initiated and cannot be covered up.  The only sane way forward would be to shut down old technology and use newer, better, stronger tech.  But we do not live in a sane world.  We live in an INSANE world.  You don’t even need to be a conspiracy theorist to see how insane this world is.

    • acerplatanoides says:

      But you are one if you admit it out loud.

    • anonymouscoward1 says:

      There’s a reason they hide too many of the details from the public, too. Nuclear power is a complicated thing that most people do not understand. They only way the public can react is “that sounds like a really big number.”
      Nuclear power, overall, is very safe. They don’t tear down the old tech and build new tech, because as soon as a building or reactor is removed, or one budget is lowered to allow for a new budget elsewhere, there will be hesitation to build the new one.

      In this case, floodwaters approached the known limit, at which point the backup would have to be used. Because of this, they added another backup, in case the backup failed.

      Including disasters like Fukushima, Three Mile Island, and Chernobyl, for every nuclear-power-related death (measured per unit of energy produced), there are about 4 deaths due to wind power, and 375 deaths due to coal power.

      There are many reasons to mistrust corporations. Fear of nuclear power is not one.

  4. Gyrofrog says:

    As Harry Shearer says, “cheap, clean, to safe to meter.”

  5. Tom says:

    High flood waters can be problematic to nuclear power plants? Who knew? We aren’t clairvoyant. I mean c’mon, it’s not like 6 months ago there was some crazy environmental disaster that caused a storm surge resulting in cooling trouble and subsequent radioactive material leakage at some other aging nuclear facility..

Leave a Reply