31 May 2012, 10:44 am
Oodain
Veteran
Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,
31 May 2012, 11:01 am
Kjas
Veteran
Joined: 26 Feb 2012
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,059
Location: the place I'm from doesn't exist anymore
31 May 2012, 9:22 pm
John_Browning
Veteran
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,456
Location: The shooting range
01 Jun 2012, 12:22 am
Vigilans wrote:
That is probably of less likelihood than someone sabotaging and detonating the contents of a nuclear reactor, especially since "getting through security" means hacking through secure networks that would not be part of the "internet"
The power plants would still have to talk to each other somehow to manage the power grid. Also making a reactor blow would require a team of physicists and engineers to reshape some fuel rods and attach specially made wires and explosives to it. In short, that would require a fission device inside the thing, as well as technicians that know how to turn a wrench in the core and a few weeks minimum to do it. Reactors are more stable than that without substantial modification, so Chernobyl-like disasters are as bad as it gets.
Vigilans wrote:
When it comes down to it, most sources of power can be weaponized if one wishes it so. Liquid Petroleum Gas tankers or Liquid Natural Gas tankers if detonated could present an explosion of kiloton proportions
Those things do blow from time to time, but not how you describe. The fuel would have to be mixed with an oxidizer to make it explode more than burn fast.
Quote:
Nobody is denying that reactors blow up and planes crash, however statistically you are more likely to electrocute yourself with a sex toy in the middle of Times Square than die on a plane or in a nuclear meltdown.
If sommeone ever did that, not only would they cinch the Darwin award for that year, but they'd earn themselves a place in the history books!
John_Browning
Veteran
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,456
Location: The shooting range
01 Jun 2012, 12:25 am
Senath wrote:
Oh God. Can you imagine if they installed one of those things and there was somehow an error with the wireless power transmission coordinates? We'd be lasered!
We'd be lasered!Or more likely, people in rural areas would try to get non-game birds to fly though it like a bug zapper from space.
01 Jun 2012, 6:50 am
01 Jun 2012, 8:29 am
01 Jun 2012, 8:43 am
01 Jun 2012, 12:59 pm
WilliamWDelaney wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
That is because nobody has yet blown a tanker (we're talking a huge amount of the stuff) in an act of terrorism.
SSSHHHHHHH! They might hear you, damn it.Oops, I should have thought of that. I must have a nefarious mind to think of these things
Even coal could be targeted; not necessarily the power plants, but coal mines. A coal mine fire can burn for hundreds of years, make large areas unstable and prone to bursts of toxic superheated gases.
ruveyn wrote:
Abdul, Ibrihim, Faisil, Achmed, Faraq and Mustapha are not going to get a hold of an h-bomb any time soon.
ruveyn
ruveyn
If this is directed at my "hydrogen explosion" description, I just want to clarify, I was not referring to hydrogen bomb thermonuclear weapons, but an explosion of pressurized gas within a nuclear reactor that releases isotopes over a large area, and with enough force, perhaps even the rods held within could be thrown hundreds of meters (such as what happened at Chernobyl)
Joker
Veteran
Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)
01 Jun 2012, 1:14 pm
01 Jun 2012, 5:57 pm
01 Jun 2012, 6:32 pm
Oodain
Veteran
Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,
01 Jun 2012, 6:45 pm
01 Jun 2012, 7:55 pm
01 Jun 2012, 7:57 pm
Oodain
Veteran
Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,
01 Jun 2012, 8:17 pm
AstroGeek wrote:
Oodain wrote:
the reactor is still running as far as i know, only one of the 3 reactor chambers were seriosuly affected and the other two never experienced anything but a controlled shutdown,
in itself a bit of a testament to the engineering of the place(not the reactor design, that had a couple of flaws,), had human stupidity not created the perfect circumstances for the aforementioned flaws to come into effect.
in itself a bit of a testament to the engineering of the place(not the reactor design, that had a couple of flaws,), had human stupidity not created the perfect circumstances for the aforementioned flaws to come into effect.
The Soviet Union was just full of contradictions wasn't it?
it truly was.
especially considering somethign as "simple" as a control rod redesign and replacement was enough to ensure decades of safe operation on the 2 remaining reactors.
with all that time and energy invested one would think they would account for the human variable, for its time it was a gigantic investment.
@ruveyn, take a look at the latest revised incident report, that report was the first to find actual engineering flaws in the design and ti also puts forth some quite odd numbers, apearantly it chimes well with the partial immunity theory of radiation, meaning that the cummulutive effects of radiation exposure that we usually think of as linear actually dont match up, some people live in areas of a literal 10 times background for 80 years as well without much discernible side effect.(some specific villages where there is a very high thorium content in the soil)
in essence the theory would mean that low continous radiation doesnt accumulate to the same degree as acute exposure, something statistics from multiple sources on patients treated with different form of radiotherapy and several surveys of long distance high altitude flying actually seems to agree with.
that said i didnt read the actual data but an article on the theory in a popsci magazine, its an interesting hypothesis.
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| Aspergers & Energy |
07 Apr 2024, 5:11 pm |
| Solar Energy Milestone: Thoughts? |
07 Apr 2024, 4:48 pm |
