Published: January 23rd, 2013 at 3:45 pm ET
|
Follow-up to: Reactor vessel "slips off" train track on way to U.S. nuclear plant (PHOTO)
Title: Nuclear train wreck
Source: Connect Savannah
Author: Jim Morekis
Date: January 15, 2013
h/t Smoking Caster
Nuclear train wreck
[...] Fast forward to Dec. 15, 2012, when the [new] 300-ton reactor vessel you bought more or less fell off a train.
[...] the vessel “became misaligned” with the specially built railroad car it was on [...]
But it gets weirder: The media, and therefore the public, didn’t find about the reactor vessel accident until Jan. 10, nearly a month later. [...]
A month after the train accident, the reactor vessel — as the accompanying photo indicates — apparently sits near the port of Savannah [...]
“It appears that multiple violations of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s regulations concerning components may have been committed and may be ongoing,” says [Tom Clements of the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability], observing that the vessel seems to be partially open to the elements and not under serious guard against tampering. [...]
View the latest photos of the reactor vessel here
Published: January 23rd, 2013 at 3:45 pm ET
|
sending...
Nice. Thats a multi million dollar lose to the industry.
They can't/shouldn't use it now. Hopefully it's a very expensive blow to the owners.
These are the types of 'accident' we need more of, a lot more.
Report Comment
The NRC will probably send out some inspectors who will superficially examine it and declare that it's perfectly safe to use.
Even if it might have been damaged, they will say that an accident resulting from it is very low probability, and so they will be willing to bank on the fact that no accident will occur that will strain it sufficiently to cause any major problems.
Report Comment
OOoorrrrr…. they'll just 'adjust' for it in the budget. Ratepayers can afford it – nuclear is almost too cheap to meter.
Report Comment
A little duct tape and it will be good as new.
Report Comment
Hilarious(!) and probably reality!
Report Comment
Nothing but scrap metal at this point. Hence the lawsuits from contractors, who are in violation of their timetables.
The question is how long will it take to get a replacement, and for how much? Didn't this take almost 3 years to build?
And I would say there's no insurance on this at all. Is the railroad now responsible for replacement and all future delays in the site's expansion? No insurance company can afford this disaster. So on to the taxpayers backs?
Report Comment
'The vessel was built in South Korea and took three years to complete'
http://chronicle.augusta.com/news/metro/2013-01-06/plant-vogtle-expansion-whats-ahead-2013
…
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-23/fukushima-engineer-says-he-covered-up-flaw-at-shut-reactor.html
'Mitsuhiko Tanaka says he helped conceal a manufacturing defect in the $250 million steel vessel installed at the Fukushima Dai-Ichi No. 4 reactor while working for a unit of Hitachi Ltd. (6501) in 1974. The reactor, which Tanaka has called a “time bomb,” was shut for maintenance when the March 11 earthquake triggered a 7-meter (23-foot) tsunami that disabled cooling systems at the plant, leading to explosions and radiation leaks.
Report Comment
"On time, under budget." Pipe dream before the accident. The most dangerous part of a nuclear reactor is the owners.
Report Comment
A steel vessel had the bravery
To shake off nuclear slavery
Took the chance
Performed some dance
Went on a run
That was fun
After some rolling in the end
Is doing camping under a tent
Marvellous free spirit sensation
We wish you a long vacation
Report Comment
OT. I have to wonder if there is Fuku dust mixed in with this:
Sickening fog settles over Salt Lake City area
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20130123/us-toxic-fog-utah/?utm_hp_ref=technology&ir=technology
Report Comment
Yay! This is just south of me. As holes. This industry needs to disappear from the planet.
Report Comment