Am I going crazy/Strange Concerns... (Prepping)
#31
Posted 05 December 2012 - 02:45 PM
#32
Posted 05 December 2012 - 02:46 PM
Nuclear facities needs constatant maintenance. If nuclear reactors overheat, they will go boom. They cannot be unsupervised.
why aren't nuclear facilities being supervised? what the hell should i be preparing for?
#33
Posted 05 December 2012 - 02:49 PM
Nuclear facities needs constatant maintenance. If nuclear reactors overheat, they will go boom. They cannot be unsupervised.
Ehhhh not exactly.
http://sciblogs.co.nz/a-measure-of-science/2011/03/16/how-to-shut-down-a-nuclear-reactor/
#34
Posted 05 December 2012 - 02:50 PM
I'm curious about this map... maps are kinda my thing...
One thing I notice right off is that there are two marks right near me in ILM. Now we do have the Brunswick Nuke Plant right across the river here, but not sure what the other mark is for? Maybe the GE plant in Castle Hayne? They have nuke facilities but no reactor that I'm aware of.
The Southport Plant has two "units". They couldn't put them right on top of each other as you wouldn't be able to discern that there were two there. Similarly there are three at the Greenville SC plant, and two at the Charlotte plant, which is why it's all a huge jumble fug right there.
http://www.animatedsoftware.com/environm/no_nukes/nukelist1.htm#NC
#35
Posted 05 December 2012 - 02:51 PM
reading this reminded me of this book I read...it's really good..he's ex military so he knows his poo when it comes to guns...it also just so happens that his wife is in my drunken book club..so we all read it one month and critiqued him on it..I'm now reading the second book in the series
http://www.amazon.co...ds=no easy hope
I no has Kindle.
Fail!!!!!!!!!!!!!
#36
Posted 05 December 2012 - 02:52 PM
The Southport Plant has two "units". They couldn't put them right on top of each other as you wouldn't be able to discern that there were two there. Similarly there are three at the Greenville SC plant, and two at the Charlotte plant, which is why it's all a huge jumble fug right there.
http://www.animateds...ukelist1.htm#NC
Yeah, I guess... in other words, shitty map making.
Would have been much better to color code multi-reactors vs single reactors.
#37
Posted 05 December 2012 - 02:53 PM
Ehhhh not exactly.
http://sciblogs.co.n...uclear-reactor/
What do you mean not exactly? If plants aren't supervised and they lose power and back up generator power, which they will in the event of societal and infrastructure meltdown - then yes, they will blow the fug up.
Edit: the power is needed to supply the coolant obviously, in case I wasn't clear.
#38
Posted 05 December 2012 - 02:55 PM
Indeed.Yeah, I guess... in other words, shitty map making.
Would have been much better to color code multi-reactors vs single reactors.
#39
Posted 05 December 2012 - 02:56 PM
Indeed.
'tis why I make the big bucks. Colorful maps.
#41
Posted 05 December 2012 - 02:57 PM
'tis why I make the big bucks. Colorful maps.
Need anyone to man the phones or apprentice?
#43
Posted 05 December 2012 - 03:00 PM
Need anyone to man the phones or apprentice?
I wish... we've barely had enough work for the 3 of us to do the last two months...
If the poo hits the fan, I'm just warning you guys now.
I'm going to fug all of your wives.
It's just the survival instinct taking over. I apologize in advance.
Jase = The Governor.
#44
Posted 05 December 2012 - 03:03 PM
What do you mean not exactly? If plants aren't supervised and they lose power and back up generator power, which they will in the event of societal and infrastructure meltdown - then yes, they will blow the fug up.
Edit: the power is needed to supply the coolant obviously, in case I wasn't clear.
EMP/SolarFlare wise, yeah its a fugin mess.
I just don't see this as a huge issue.
Especially were I will eventually be.
#45
Posted 05 December 2012 - 03:04 PM
I no has Kindle.
Fail!!!!!!!!!!!!!
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users







