[ RadSafe ] "Communicating with the public and the press"
Estabrooks, H Bates (IHK)
estabrookshb at y12.doe.gov
Wed Aug 21 08:54:45 CDT 2013
Joe,
Good point. We clearly understand now the "new reality" of coastal Japan.
Thanks.
Bates
-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of JPreisig at aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 9:52 AM
To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] "Communicating with the public and the press"
Radsafe:
No impugning desired. However, current oceanfront Japanese reactors
apparently need a 50 foot
high tsunami wall for NEXT TIME.
Joe Preisig
In a message dated 8/21/2013 9:46:19 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
estabrookshb at y12.doe.gov writes:
The EDGs were flood protected. It's disingenuous to impugn the plant
designers/builders by suggesting otherwise. The seawalls were just not
sufficient to protect against the historically unprecedented wave heights.
---
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster:
"The earthquake was followed by a 13-15 m (43-49 ft) maximum height
tsunami arriving approximately 50 minutes later which topped the plant's 5.7 m
(19 ft) seawall,[74][75][76] flooding the basement of the Turbine Buildings
and disabling the emergency diesel generators[77][78] located there[73] at
approximately 15:41.[71][79]"
-----Original Message-----
From: William Lipton [mailto:doctorbill34 at gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 9:39 AM
To: Estabrooks, H Bates (IHK); radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu; Peter Crane
Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] "Communicating with the public and the press"
Are you saying that it takes a "prophetic" engineer to flood protect
emergency systems for a tsunami susceptible plant?
Bill Lipton
It's not about dose, it's
Sent from my Windows Phone
From: Estabrooks, H Bates (IHK)
Sent: 8/21/2013 8:47
To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu; Peter Crane; William Lipton
Cc: Estabrooks, H Bates (IHK)
Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] "Communicating with the public and the press"
Bill,
How far beyond the "beyond design basis event/accident" do you design for?
The magnitudes of the earthquake and resultant tsunami were
historically unprecedented.
To insist on a design/build to protect against them would not have
called for a "courageous" engineer, but rather a prophetic engineer.
So far we have no degree programs for that skill.
Bates Estabrooks
Y-12
-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of William
Lipton
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 8:38 AM
To: Peter Crane; radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] "Communicating with the public and the press"
(Otto G. Raabe)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Instead of debating what brand of lipstick to put on the pig, we should
be addressing the real safety issues. You can never explain away
Fukushima or other fiascos.
Compliance with the letter of the regs is not good enough. One engineer
with the competence and courage to insist the emergency generators be
flood protected would have prevented a tragedy that will affect
generations.
Bill Lipton
It's not about dose, it's about trust.
_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
More information about the RadSafe
mailing list