What Separates Chernobyl from
Three Mile Island and Fukushima
National Review,
by
Jim Geraghty
Original Article
Posted By: Pluperfect,
6/7/2019 5:18:28 AM
One of the dumber responses to HBO’s just-completed Chernobyl miniseries — discussed by Kyle Smith on the homepage today – is that somehow it’s unfairly picking on the Soviet Union. “Where’s the miniseries about Three Mile Island? Where’s the miniseries about Fukushima?”
This argument amounts to, “I’ve heard about two other nuclear power plant disasters, thus all three must be the same.”
As I wrote back in February, even a cursory study shows the three situations were all different. The partial meltdown and radiation leak at Three Mile Island in 1979 was serious — but the public was informed quickly, if not terribly clearly. Three Mile Island forever tainted the image
Reply 1 - Posted by:
jeffkinnh 6/7/2019 6:48:22 AM (No. 92478)
For all the fear associated with nuclear power, it is technology and almost ALL technology comes with some side effects and risk. Electrical power kills 100's of people in the US every year. Yet we all have it in our homes and almost no one would consider living without it. That is FAR more deaths than is associated with nuclear power and in our homes we have NO regular exposure to it. Three Mile Island was a early technology nuclear plant and the accident was serious. Yet the damage was contained and there was negligible radioactivity released. There was NO contamination of the surrounding environment. Fukushima was also older technology overwhelmed by a massive earthquake and tsunami. Unfortunately, there is still leaking of radioactivity into the ocean and the long term effects of such radioactivity is difficult to directly determine.
So there are risks. Risks associated with nuclear are very low compared to other forms of energy production and the use of energy itself. Newer designs of power plants would eliminate the types of problems that happened in these 3 accidents. That makes nuclear safer but NOT risk free. The possibility of a nuclear explosion, the bogeyman of activism is nonexistant.
On the other hand, nuclear doesn't produce CO2 or particulates. It is cheap. It is 24/7/365 reliable.
16 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
Bur Oak 6/7/2019 7:21:24 AM (No. 92511)
The big difference was the poor design of the Soviet reactor.
13 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
dcbroome 6/7/2019 7:48:57 AM (No. 92529)
For any L-dotters who have not seen the miniseries, it is absolutely fantastic. Acting is superb. Riveting!!
9 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
philsner 6/7/2019 8:17:50 AM (No. 92558)
#1, Chernobyl didn't need "newer" design. If it had had the "proper" design that existed at the time, the disaster could have been mitigated. As was shown in the last episode, the Russian reactors lacked a containment building - something every reactor in the west has as a basic safety feature. In addition, the Chernobyl control rods were not adequate and actually accelerated the power excursion the caused the explosion - because they were cheaper to manufacture.
The point is, just as with the Soviet nuclear submarine disaster, the communists built everything thinking of upfront cost while denying the risks. It was the insanity of the left.
13 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
GO3 6/7/2019 8:54:52 AM (No. 92590)
I haven’t seen the mini-series, but there has been no discussion of the lead up to the accident. Design was a factor but it didn’t happen “just because.” The manager decided to conduct a test to see if the facility could run on internal electrical power in case the external grid went down. No one in the hierarchy authorized the test to my knowledge, there was no rehearsal, the crew was not proficient, and people at the controls over- compensated the corrections. Btw, the other reactors at the site continued to operate for many years afterwards. IMO, this further demonstrates the decrepit nature of Soviet industry and the culture itself.
9 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
Rumblehog 6/7/2019 2:10:07 PM (No. 92818)
What made Chernobyl and Fukushima similar was that both reactors were horribly outdated and were about to be mothballed when the accidents took place. As a result of the TMI accident, a new discipline was adopted in not only nuclear power plant design, but aircraft design, also, known as Safety Analysis, Failure Mode Effects Analysis (FMEA), and Fault Tree Design. This is an Engineering discipline that identifies flaws in designs before they're institutionalized and avoids grievous errors. One such tragedy involved having all hydraulic lines routed at the same location under the main turbine of the DC-10 center engine. When the impeller wheel shattered due to a metallurgical flaw, the Sioux City, IA accident of United Airlines Flight 232 was the result. Today's "Zonal Analysis" discipline would have prevented that design from ever going into production.
Today's proposed nuclear designs, still waiting to be cleared by the Federal joke DoEn, are a thousand times safer than anything operational today, but they sit on their bloody bureaucrat hands because it's job security keeping programs under development.
3 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
DVC 6/7/2019 5:07:03 PM (No. 92938)
Not one person was directly harmed from the TINY, difficult to detect leak from TMI. I was in Baltimore when it happened. There are claims of possible links between TMI and some thyroid cancer, questionable, IMO, but possible.
Not o e person was exposed by the total, uncontrolled meltdown of THREE 1st generation US type reactors, their emergency meltdown Tories work perfectly. The "temporary " spent fuel storage pools were damaged by the CDC quake and lost their critical water to cool and moderate
the still radioactive fuel, left in the pools for years because of antinuclear activists lawsuits.
Chernobyl had NO containment vessel, use graphite, which burned like coal, and blew the entire contents out 8nto the air. Russia mentioned NOTHING until forced by Swedish detection of the radioactive plume.
No person at Fukishima exceeded the safe annual dosage of radiation. Dozens died in days at Chernobyl, dozens more very sick, likely hundreds of cancers from it. Nobody died, nobody got sick at Fukishima.
Like comparing a bicycle accident to a 100 car and semi freeway pileup. Both are vehicle accidents but the scales are not remotely the same.
1 person likes this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
DVC 6/7/2019 5:10:19 PM (No. 92943)
Damned phone. Tories was 'fixed' from toriods.
1 person likes this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
Hermoine 6/7/2019 5:32:18 PM (No. 92956)
#5 -- They address everything you discussed in the miniseries. I was amazed at how accurately they portrayed the USSR. And, there were people within the USSR - the scientists - who actually pushed back and pushed for truth.
2 people like this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "Pluperfect"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)