Isn't the amount of waste produced each year from a single reactor relatively small? Smaller than one might think?

 

It is much smaller, yes. I will try to find a comparison for you when I get a chance.

Thanks for the lesson in nuclear reactors TBG!! It was an excellent read.

 

Thanks!

Most people would concider hydro electric power extremely safe yet the greatest tragedy of a power facility was the failure of the Banqiao Reservoir Dam, in China. 1975

 

The Dam was designed to survive a 1-in-1,000-year flood (300 mm of rainfall per day). In August of 1975, however, a 1-in-2,000 year flood occurred, and poured more than a year's rainfall in 24 hours (new records were set, at 189.5 mm rainfall per hour and 1060 mm per day, exceeding the average annual precipitation of about 800 mm), which weather forecasts failed to predict, produced by the collision of Super Typhoon Nina and a cold front. Communication to the dam was largely lost due to the collapse of buildings under heavy rain and wire failures. On August 6, a request to open the dam was rejected, because of the existing flood in downstream areas.

 

On August 8, 0:30, the smaller Shimantan Dam, which was designed to survive a 1-in-500-year flood, failed to handle more than twice its capacity and broke upstream, only 10 minutes after Unit 34450 sent a request that would open the Banqiao Dam by air strike. A half hour later, at 1:00, water crested at the Banqiao Dam and it too failed. This precipitated the failure of 62 dams in total. The runoff of Banqiao Dam was 13,000 m³ per second in vs. 78,800 m³ per second out, and 701 million tons of water was released in 6 hours, while 1.67 billion tons of water was released in 5.5 hours at upriver Shimantan Dam, and 15.738 billion tons of water was released in total.

 

The resulting flood waters caused a large wave, which was 10 kilometres (6.2 mi) wide and 3–7 m (9.8–23 ) high in Suiping to rush downwards into the plains below at nearly 50 kilometres per hour (31.1 mph), almost wipe out an area 55 kilometres (34.2 mi) long and 15 kilometres (9.3 mi) wide, and create temporary lakes as large as 12000 square kilometres (4,633.2 sq mi). Seven county seats were inundated, as were thousands of square kilometers of countryside and countless communities. Evacuation orders had not been fully delivered because of weather conditions and poor communications. Telegraphs failed, signal flares fired by Unit 34450 were misunderstood, telephones were rare, and some messengers were caught by the flood. While only 827 out of 6,000 people died in the evacuated community of Shahedian just below Banqiao Dam, half of a total of 36,000 people died in the unevacuated Wencheng commune of Suipin County next to Shahedian, and the Daowencheng Commune was wiped from the map, killing all 9,600 citizens. Although a large number of people were reported lost at first, many of them returned home later. Tens of thousands of them were carried by the water to downriver provinces and many others fled from their homes. It has been reported that around 90,000 - 230,000 people were killed as a result of the dam breaking.

 

According to the Hydrology Department of Henan Province, in the province, approximately 26,000 people died from flooding, and another 145,000 died during subsequent epidemics and famine. In addition, about 5,960,000 buildings collapsed, and 11 million residents were affected.

 

The death toll of this disaster was declassified in 2005.

 

Pretty wild http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Banqiao_Dam

Most people would concider hydro electric power extremely safe yet the greatest tragedy of a power facility was the failure of the Banqiao Reservoir Dam, in China. 1975

 

Pretty wild http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Banqiao_Dam

 

Wow...I'd never even heard of that.

Wow...I'd never even heard of that.

 

Me either until today. Had to go look it up after I heard it.

Not to make light of a tragedy at all, and I know the comparison is absurd so I'm putting that out there first. But are any politicians now backtracking about public transportation especially rail and subway? Weren't some trains swept out to sea and everyone had to find ways around inclusing walking home well over 12 hours in some cases because they were waiting for public transportation that never came? Again, I know it is a goofy comaprison but the public transportation system let down a ton of people that day and since then.

Not to make light of a tragedy at all, and I know the comparison is absurd so I'm putting that out there first. But are any politicians now backtracking about public transportation especially rail and subway? Weren't some trains swept out to sea and everyone had to find ways around inclusing walking home well over 12 hours in some cases because they were waiting for public transportation that never came? Again, I know it is a goofy comaprison but the public transportation system let down a ton of people that day and since then.

 

I'm not clear on your issue here, as many cars were swept out to sea, also. Are you saying that the systems were poorly built? Or that public transportation in a city is a waste? Or something else?

I'm not clear on your issue here, as many cars were swept out to sea, also. Are you saying that the systems were poorly built? Or that public transportation in a city is a waste? Or something else?

 

My issue is the media and politicians letting the nuclear incident in Japan derail the future of nuclear energy here and using Japan as an example. Meanwhile the public transportation system was brutally bad in Japan after this terrible traagedy but I doubt the media and politicians will want to get rid of their ideas to expand public transportation ie...street cars in Cincy and a rail sytem in Ohio.

Build em and Build em now !!!!!! Just not in a seismically active zone .

 

 

Lots of pipe in those nuclear plants. :thumb:

Here is a good answer to your question. Its about midway down the page but does offer up why some would hesitate in using a method such as that: http://www.slate.com/id/2181280/

 

It may burn it up, but I assume it would still release all of the radiation into the atmosephere.

 

Guess that makes sense. I never really thought it through that deeply.

Does anyone know about the French "recyclying" their waste? I caught part of an interview today that said they did not store waste as we do. I ,also, am again so tired of the hysteria of the news media about nuclear energy. They constantly sway the news instead of reporting fact. I live 9.8 miles from St Lucie Power and been thru 3 hurricanes with it there. I am safe.

Does anyone know about the French "recyclying" their waste? I caught part of an interview today that said they did not store waste as we do. I ,also, am again so tired of the hysteria of the news media about nuclear energy. They constantly sway the news instead of reporting fact. I live 9.8 miles from St Lucie Power and been thru 3 hurricanes with it there. I am

safe.

 

Newer reactors are more efficient and can actually reuse fuel from older reactors. This helps to shorten the half-life of the radioactive waste and helps to keep costs down by allowing already manufactured fuel rods to be used again.

 

Of course I really have been on board with an entirely different form of nuclear reactor technology that doesn't require the plumbing that other models do. No pressurized steam to escape or explode.