Am I going crazy/Strange Concerns... (Prepping)
#136
Posted 06 December 2012 - 03:34 PM
u heard it here first
#137
Posted 06 December 2012 - 03:39 PM
#138
Posted 06 December 2012 - 06:15 PM
Im not seeing your point - total power failure let to the Fukushima explosions - who cares how they got there?
I beg to differ....the flooding caused the issues. Had it been just a simple total power outage, there would not have been any issues. The flooding afterwards is where the problems came from. Flooding that would not have occured outside of normal day to day activities.
How many power outages do you think happen world wide each year?
How many catastrophic failures happen in that same year?
my point simply was that these facilities are designed to completely safe themselves in the event of a total loss of power. Other circumstances can not all be accounted for....flooding, severe weather, acts of terrorism etc.
#139
Posted 06 December 2012 - 06:30 PM
#140
Posted 06 December 2012 - 10:15 PM
Almost every person they have featured is either has a form of OCD, is just plain uneducated, or simply wants to be on TV.
#141
Guest_Tom Cat_*
Posted 07 December 2012 - 08:40 AM
I beg to differ....the flooding caused the issues. Had it been just a simple total power outage, there would not have been any issues. The flooding afterwards is where the problems came from. Flooding that would not have occured outside of normal day to day activities.
How many power outages do you think happen world wide each year?
How many catastrophic failures happen in that same year?
my point simply was that these facilities are designed to completely safe themselves in the event of a total loss of power. Other circumstances can not all be accounted for....flooding, severe weather, acts of terrorism etc.
I see what you are saying, but in the case of something like a nuclear reactor, where the consequences of an accident, terroism, or act of God are catastropic, ALL potential failures should be planned for no matter how remote, before the thing is even built.
In other news - are you old enough to remember this?
http://en.wikipedia....Bhopal_disaster
#142
Posted 07 December 2012 - 08:45 AM
I see what you are saying, but in the case of something like a nuclear reactor, where the consequences of an accident, terroism, or act of God are catastropic, ALL potential failures should be planned for no matter how remote, before the thing is even built.
In other news - are you old enough to remember this?
http://en.wikipedia....Bhopal_disaster
Psshhhhh... Hawk is old as dirt.
#143
Posted 07 December 2012 - 10:52 AM
it would be a wonderful thing to be able to design these facilities for every scenario but ultimately impossible too. I would certainly argue that a nuclear facility right on the coast should certainly be prepared for flooding. I know many of the refineries and chemical plants on the Gulf Coast and Eastern Seaboard have all sorts of procedures in place to deal with severe weather etc.
#144
Posted 07 December 2012 - 01:03 PM
this isn't contrarian at all right now... this is trendy as all hell.
Thank God.
Hopefully this will encourage saving, and self reliance as well.
Somehow I doubt it though.
#145
Posted 07 December 2012 - 01:04 PM
Thank God.
Hopefully this will encourage saving, and self reliance as well.
Somehow I doubt it though.
i think it's encouraging people to go out and buy lots of shiat.
#146
Posted 07 December 2012 - 01:10 PM
More for total collapse type stuff then disasters we have seen.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users





