Member of the Month

hi_vis360
November, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

If one of those tornadoes hit a nuke plant...

profile picture
oceanic
Posts: 95 - Karma: 11
...it would make quite a fucking mess. That one makes me nervous. Nuke fuel would be shredded and strewn absolutely everywhere. Radiation MESS. There are reactors similar in design to Fukushima-Daichii, fantastic. What to do?
Apr 28 2011 8:49PM
0 0
profile picture
maximiliaan
Posts: 7711 - Karma: 2,857
run and scream around
Apr 28 2011 8:51PM
0 0
profile picture
Flying~Squirrel
Posts: 6494 - Karma: 192
they made a movie about this. it was called tornadoes i think. it sucked.
Apr 28 2011 8:54PM
0 0
profile picture
Pastie
Posts: 676 - Karma: 146
I don't think you realize that the containers the nuclear fuel rods and waste are in are made of huge slabs of 9 foot thick concrete, making them fucking bomb proof. Fuckishima only happened because it was shaken by I believe an 8.9 earthquake.
Apr 28 2011 8:55PM
0 0
profile picture
Pastie
Posts: 676 - Karma: 146
And yes I said Fuckishima
Apr 28 2011 8:56PM
0 0
profile picture
SeanTom
Posts: 7936 - Karma: 1,747
haha, thanks for confirming.


Apr 28 2011 8:59PM
0 0
profile picture
no_steeze
Posts: 23992 - Karma: 4,273
it'd take a fucking bear of a tornado to take down a nuclear plant
Apr 28 2011 9:02PM
0 0
profile picture
hawaiiansteeze
Posts: 3255 - Karma: 3,226
and because the tsunami flooded the backup generators, causing the plants to lose power, and thats why they couldnt keep the rods cooled, which lead to the disaster.

unless it was a supertornado or something i dont think it would destroy a reactor. but who knows i could be completely wrong
Apr 28 2011 9:04PM
0 0
profile picture
oceanic
Posts: 95 - Karma: 11
No cuz if you you look at the aftermath photos from the two huge ones the other day (record-setting, might I add) you can see that there's only a small chance that most of a nuclear plant would hold up.
Apr 28 2011 9:06PM
0 0
profile picture
oceanic
Posts: 95 - Karma: 11
Click for larger image
Apr 28 2011 9:08PM
0 0
profile picture
1337
Posts: 31059 - Karma: 29,335
>implying nuclear housing isn't built to withstand the impact of a 747 crash
Apr 28 2011 9:10PM
0 0
profile picture
eastcoaste
Posts: 165 - Karma: 18
everyone dies.... ah man did i ruin the ending
Apr 28 2011 9:13PM
0 0
profile picture
Pastie
Posts: 676 - Karma: 146
When people build a nuclear plant in an area where tornadoes or tsunamis happen they don't fuck around. If people can withstand a tornado in their homemade shelter, than a nuclear plant definitely can.
Apr 28 2011 9:13PM
0 0
profile picture
oceanic
Posts: 95 - Karma: 11
^look at the TREES!!
Apr 28 2011 9:14PM
0 0
profile picture
SeanTom
Posts: 7936 - Karma: 1,747
pretty much this

sorry op, but you're way in the wrong on this
Apr 28 2011 9:14PM
0 0
profile picture
SneakyTurtle
Posts: 228 - Karma: 30
Word.

Fukushima was hit with a magnitude 8.9 earthquake and then a tsunami. The death toll related to the nuclear plant is zero. If this isn't proof of the viability of nuclear power, I don't know what is.
Apr 28 2011 9:14PM
0 0
profile picture
Will_
Posts: 271 - Karma: 110
Coal power has killed far more people than nuclear.
Apr 28 2011 9:15PM
0 0
profile picture
EC-Skier
Posts: 3899 - Karma: 668

1. find hole

2. get in hole

3. curl up in hole

4. cry

5. wait for end of world

Apr 28 2011 9:16PM
0 0
profile picture
oceanic
Posts: 95 - Karma: 11
You must be dumb as fuck. 1)shelters are underground 2)bigger buildings have to withstand more force 3)I don't think you realize how powerful 200+mph wind is and what it can move
Apr 28 2011 9:16PM
0 0
profile picture
Pastie
Posts: 676 - Karma: 146
Click for larger imageyyour comparing that^ to this [IMG]topnews.in/files/nuclear_0.jpg[/IMG]
Apr 28 2011 9:17PM
0 0
profile picture
Pastie
Posts: 676 - Karma: 146
[IMG]topnews.in/files/nuclear_0.jpg[/IMG]
Apr 28 2011 9:17PM
0 0
profile picture
Pastie
Posts: 676 - Karma: 146
Fuck it

[IMG]elrst.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/nuclear02.jpg[/IMG]
Apr 28 2011 9:18PM
0 0
profile picture
sector_6_films
Posts: 144 - Karma: 75
damn man why did u have to ruin it for mee :(
Apr 28 2011 9:19PM
0 0
profile picture
SmokeyTheBear
Posts: 492 - Karma: 24
You're being a dumbass.  You're implying they already haven't thought of this, when tornados happen dozens of times every year in the midwest.  The concrete structures are built to withstand enormous force
Apr 28 2011 9:20PM
0 0
profile picture
oceanic
Posts: 95 - Karma: 11
Again, you're fucking dumb. Look at the first photo I posted. It is from Alabama's record setting tornado the other day. IF a mile wide tornado ripped right through a reactor building, all the wind tunnel force would blast it apart. And cooling would be fucking GONE, and then its the same shit. Worst case, radioactive pieces get tossed around.
Apr 28 2011 9:21PM
0 0
profile picture
Pastie
Posts: 676 - Karma: 146
No you must be dumb as fuck, They store fuel rods underground and like I said they are stored in containers of 9 foot concrete. I didn't realize you are a fucking two year old.
Apr 28 2011 9:21PM
0 0
profile picture
oceanic
Posts: 95 - Karma: 11
But not EXTREME weather which is what the latest RECORD SETTING tornado was. It's the at the limit or higher of building STANDARDS.
Apr 28 2011 9:23PM
0 0
profile picture
oceanic
Posts: 95 - Karma: 11
You do not know what you are talking about, but you think you do, especially from an engineering perspective. And to call me a 2 year old makes you a fucking 12 year old, maybe better.
Apr 28 2011 9:24PM
0 0
profile picture
no_steeze
Posts: 23992 - Karma: 4,273
they are DESIGNED to WITHSTAND forces MORE POWERFUL than natural DISASTERS
Apr 28 2011 9:24PM
0 0
profile picture
Six.0.Tree-ski
Posts: 4059 - Karma: 67
I hate retards who capitalize random words to try to get their point across.
Apr 28 2011 9:25PM
0 0
profile picture
broto
Posts: 9039 - Karma: 25,664
did you read the fucking thread? people understand the consequences of this stuff and build their nukin plants accordingly. ignorant post is ignorant
Apr 28 2011 9:25PM
0 0
profile picture
oceanic
Posts: 95 - Karma: 11
THEN WHY WOULD THE GOVERNMENT RIGHT NOW NEED TO EVEN BOTHER ASSESSING SAFETY STANDARDS??? derp
Apr 28 2011 9:26PM
0 0
profile picture
no_steeze
Posts: 23992 - Karma: 4,273
because they're constantly assessing safety standards for nuclear plants. it's not that they aren't safe enough, they could just always be safer
Apr 28 2011 9:28PM
0 0
profile picture
oceanic
Posts: 95 - Karma: 11
You're dumb too. I was speaking worst-case winds. But a good twister will rip through and take the backup diesel generators and without any kind of power (yeah didn't you hear? nuke plants need electricity at all times) there is a meltdown. Any scientist knows that.

SO to sum it up in a more probable manner for you:
TWISTER THRU NUKE PLANT >= MELTDOWN
Apr 28 2011 9:29PM
0 0
profile picture
Dwarftosser1
Posts: 2602 - Karma: 951
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission sets design standards for nuclear plants. Right now, plants have to be able to handle the most severe tornado that could reasonably be predicted to occur at the site.

yes that was copy paste
Apr 28 2011 9:30PM
0 0
profile picture
oceanic
Posts: 95 - Karma: 11
key word: reasonably
Apr 28 2011 9:30PM
0 0
profile picture
broto
Posts: 9039 - Karma: 25,664
also, since when has a nuclear plant been a "standard" building?
Apr 28 2011 9:30PM
0 0
profile picture
oceanic
Posts: 95 - Karma: 11
LMAO!! There building standards for any type of building, nuclear power plants included. It has nothing to do with being a "standard building" or not bahahah
Apr 28 2011 9:33PM
0 0
profile picture
Pastie
Posts: 676 - Karma: 146
This is the aftermath of Hiroshima's City Hall, a fairly strong building made of 1 foot concrete slabs, when the U.S.A dropped a nuclear bomb, one of the biggest of all time which had an impact of 35 tons per square meter, on Hiroshima:







If you believe that 200 mph winds would destroy a building made of 9 foot concrete














slabs, and also like I said all the reactors are kept underground along with the waste,














then you sir, are a dumbass.

Apr 28 2011 9:36PM
0 0
profile picture
Golden.
Posts: 233 - Karma: 52
It seems reasonable to assume that because there are different safety standards for different types of buildings, a nuclear power plant would have far higher standards than those houses that got torn to shreds.
Apr 28 2011 9:36PM
0 0
profile picture
Chompo.
Posts: 4952 - Karma: 88
this thread sucks
Apr 28 2011 9:38PM
0 0
profile picture
chill_davis
Posts: 2107 - Karma: 650
yes.
Apr 28 2011 9:39PM
0 0
profile picture
oceanic
Posts: 95 - Karma: 11
No. Some of the ones America has are also ones like in Fukushima, with spent fuel pools sitting above ground, and those ones would make a mess.
Apr 28 2011 9:42PM
0 0
profile picture
broto
Posts: 9039 - Karma: 25,664
you are digging yourself deeper and deeper. would an engineer not design a nuclear plant to survive 10x the worst case scenario? a tornado is not going to tear through a nuclear plant and screw us all.. ever.
Apr 28 2011 9:45PM
0 0
profile picture
Flying~Squirrel
Posts: 6494 - Karma: 192
you people are literally calling each other dumbasses over and over again because somebody made a stupid thread about twisters. you are not meteorologists and you are not nuclear engineers, so stop pretending to be.
Apr 28 2011 9:50PM
0 0
profile picture
no_steeze
Posts: 23992 - Karma: 4,273
does your sig talk about people falling down ripcord at mt snow?
Apr 28 2011 9:51PM
0 0
profile picture
Six.0.Tree-ski
Posts: 4059 - Karma: 67
you're a retard. gtfo NS
Apr 28 2011 9:53PM
0 0
profile picture
JewRad
Posts: 432 - Karma: 23
6. ???????
7. PROFIT!!!!!
Apr 28 2011 9:55PM
0 0
profile picture
fdsa
Posts: 686 - Karma: 19
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/reg-guides/power-reactors/rg/01-076/01-076.pdf

Now please go worry about something more pressing, like whether your mom or your "girlfriend's" mom is taking you two to the movies for your date tomorrow night.
Apr 28 2011 9:55PM
0 0
profile picture
oceanic
Posts: 95 - Karma: 11
Well, you'd think they would, but they do not plan for the 10x worst case because we still make up the reasonably worst case. Do you know what the word unprecedented means? You think your so safe. So did fucking Japan, even Chernobyl.
Apr 28 2011 9:56PM
0 0
profile picture
broto
Posts: 9039 - Karma: 25,664
tornado =/= earthquake and tsunami
Apr 28 2011 9:57PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)