Japan to Build 22 Coal-Burning Power PlantsEnvironmental | 206853 hits | Feb 10 9:01 am | Posted by: Freakinoldguy Commentsview comments in forum Page 1 2 You need to be a member of CKA and be logged into the site, to comment on news. |
Share
|
Mobile
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
Either way I like this part:
Where's
un-general-assembly-climate-conference-390x285.jpg
when you need her.
So, this would appear to be the result of the Fukishima disaster. Or has Japan just given up on trying to be green?
100% about Fukushima. The Japanese are very wary about nuclear power since Fukushima. But, don't tell them coal plants emit more radiation than Nuclear . . . It'll be our secret.
So, this would appear to be the result of the Fukishima disaster. Or has Japan just given up on trying to be green?
100% about Fukushima. The Japanese are very wary about nuclear power since Fukushima. But, don't tell them coal plants emit more radiation than Nuclear . . . It'll be our secret.
Sure, until the nuclear one is hit by a very large, powerful wave, melts down and then all bets are off because it won't be trace amounts of naturally occurring radioactive waste it'll be a massive amount of the good stuff.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british- ... -1.5457912
https://www.cbc.ca/news/indigenous/rcmp ... -1.5457916
Reap what you've deliberately sown, Horgan, you backstabbing son of a bitch.
So, this would appear to be the result of the Fukishima disaster. Or has Japan just given up on trying to be green?
100% about Fukushima. The Japanese are very wary about nuclear power since Fukushima. But, don't tell them coal plants emit more radiation than Nuclear . . . It'll be our secret.
Sure, until the nuclear one is hit by a very large, powerful wave, melts down and then all bets are off because it won't be trace amounts of naturally occurring radioactive waste it'll be a massive amount of the good stuff.
Japan had a very successful nuclear program. It was one of the few who reprocessed their waste back into usable fuel.
Fukushima survived the earthquake, but the tsunami is what did in it's external power source. And only because the site was already being decommissioned. But the Japanese are almost neurotic about their food, and the fallout reaching such a large area spooked many against nuclear power.
I imagine at some time this panic will subside, but in the mean time they are reconsidering almost all of their other nuclear plants and need something to cover the shortfall in electric production.
So, this would appear to be the result of the Fukishima disaster. Or has Japan just given up on trying to be green?
The Nipponese have just given up on the charade of trying to be green.
Where's
when you need her.
Just give it time and any perception problems in the cult of environmentally-pretardation will solve themselves by attrition because most kids know both scams more than adults ever will.
Japan had a very successful nuclear program. It was one of the few who reprocessed their waste back into usable fuel.Fukushima survived the earthquake, but the tsunami is what did in it's external power source. And only because the site was already being decommissioned. But the Japanese are almost neurotic about their food, and the fallout reaching such a large area spooked many against nuclear power.I imagine at some time this panic will subside, but in the mean time they are reconsidering almost all of their other nuclear plants and need something to cover the shortfall in electric production.
I've looked but don't know how to phrase it right. Any estimate of what would happen if the same thing happens to a coal burning plant that hit the nuclear facility?
A wave hitting a coal plant would be far different than a Nuclear plant. (Poorly designed) Nuclear plants need water to keep the core cool, and electricity to circulate that water. If the core isn't cooled, bad things happen.
Remove electricity from a coal plant, and they just go dark.
^^
A wave hitting a coal plant would be far different than a Nuclear plant. (Poorly designed) Nuclear plants need water to keep the core cool, and electricity to circulate that water. If the core isn't cooled, bad things happen.
Remove electricity from a coal plant, and they just go dark.
Are you saying that there are nuclear plants that do not use water to cool the core?
^^
A wave hitting a coal plant would be far different than a Nuclear plant. (Poorly designed) Nuclear plants need water to keep the core cool, and electricity to circulate that water. If the core isn't cooled, bad things happen.
Remove electricity from a coal plant, and they just go dark.
Are you saying that there are nuclear plants that do not use water to cool the core?
No, I'm saying poorly designed ones don't account for all possible failures.
Shutdown system #1 – high-speed insertion of shut-off rods into the reactor to immediately stop the nuclear reaction;
Shutdown system #2 – injection of neutron-absorbing materials into the moderator, which can also halt the nuclear reaction;
Emergency core cooling system – injection of high-pressure water into the reactor cooling system if there is a failure of the piping.
https://teachnuclear.ca/all-things-nucl ... or-safety/
Fukushima required an external power source to maintain water flow around the core to keep it cool. There was no backup for that system.
^^
A wave hitting a coal plant would be far different than a Nuclear plant. (Poorly designed) Nuclear plants need water to keep the core cool, and electricity to circulate that water. If the core isn't cooled, bad things happen.
Remove electricity from a coal plant, and they just go dark.
Okay that's along the lines of what I was thinking would happen. Thanks
Probably be a lot of pollution from the coal ash getting flooded and spread out around the plant if a tsunami hit it. Any nearby waterway would be fucked for a while from it, but then again it would also be badly damaged from everything else a major flood washed into and not just from the coal ash. The monetary damage would be huge from whatever electrical equipment got soaked and effectively destroyed by a flood. All said though it wouldn't be permanently damaging as much as nuclear waste getting washed out into the nearby environment or ocean.
Japan had a very successful nuclear program. It was one of the few who reprocessed their waste back into usable fuel.
Fukushima survived the earthquake, but the tsunami is what did in it's external power source. And only because the site was already being decommissioned. But the Japanese are almost neurotic about their food, and the fallout reaching such a large area spooked many against nuclear power.
I imagine at some time this panic will subside, but in the mean time they are reconsidering almost all of their other nuclear plants and need something to cover the shortfall in electric production.
They've been terrified of nuclear power since August 9th 1945 and you can understand why. If you're the only country in the world to have be nuked in anger there's good reason to be somewhat leery of Nuclear anything.
I also agree with Thanos. Natural gas would be a much better alternative to more coal fired power plants. So, I wonder if they've considered building these new coal fired power plants with some contingencies built in so they could convert them to natural gas at a later date.