Quote:
Originally Posted by motorhead
Just stopping in to see if you guys solved the worlds energy problems. LOL
I just have to say that I agree with everyone that nuclear is the way to go in the long run. It's just hard for some of us to get over the fear when we lived through a real life accident. I don't think any of you including the ones the work in that field can truly understand what was going through peoples minds at that time unless you went through this type of thing. It sticks with you.
You Guys keep using Homer Simpson as a reason for some us to have problems with the safety of nuclear power. That's pretty insulting for you to think that people are that stupid to base real life on a cartoon. If you really want people to change their minds about nuclear power then you need to first sit back and try to look at our side so that you can help us to feel more safe.
My wife was in a very bad car accident a long time ago that split the car that she was driving completely in two pieces. She was critical for a long time. To this day it is still hard for her to get in that car and drive 1 mile to work without worry.
Frankly, If we didn't live near TMI went that happened I'm sure I would have any problems with nuclear. The problem is people control these things and people make mistakes and don't also do what they are supposed to. If they can build a nuclear power plant that doesn't rely on a person making the right choice or one that when they make the wrong choice it's full proof to be safe, then I would be completely on board with that.
I know that no one died at TMI nor did much radiation leak out ,but that was still a very scary thing to go through , and look a what happened in Russia. That could have caused and still could be causing world wide problems that we will never know about.
Sorry to ramble, but I'm looking for solid proof that these things won't happen again and not just for me ,but for my kids and their kids too.
|
You can remove human operators from a control room, but then you have to rely on the engineers anticipating every event and designing the system to compensate, and do it perfectly. But you can't anticipate everything, particularly with something as complex as a nuclear reactor. And when an engineer makes a design mistake, without a human in the loop the system can be a total loss, which is simply unacceptable when that 'total loss' means a nuclear meltdown. Its far safer to have an experienced, alert opperator there monitoring the equipment. The trick is, how do you keep the operators alert? Watching gauges all day long and seeing next to no changes becomes exceedingly boring and tedious. But that is a far easier problem to solve than making a perfect system.