- #1
mhs25
- 7
- 0
With everything that's going on at Fukushima, I'm wondering how a newer reactor (Generation III or newer) would have held up under the same conditions?
I understand it's near impossible to tell from anything this catastrophic and unprecedented, but perhaps Astronuc or someone else more educated then me (I'm still just a student) could give their opinions.
From what I understand, the ABWR and AP-1000 have passive safety systems, cooling loops that flow by natural convection instead of by pumps. This would make the current problem impossible, yes? What would need to happen in order for this to fail? And would it be more or less likely to fail in a 9.0 Earthquake and Tsunami?
Fukushima Reactor number one was built in 1970 correct? With the others following not long after that. These would be considered Generation II reactors right? Is Generation I just the early research reactors or are there commercial plants that are considered Generation I?
Thanks for any answers you can provide.
I understand it's near impossible to tell from anything this catastrophic and unprecedented, but perhaps Astronuc or someone else more educated then me (I'm still just a student) could give their opinions.
From what I understand, the ABWR and AP-1000 have passive safety systems, cooling loops that flow by natural convection instead of by pumps. This would make the current problem impossible, yes? What would need to happen in order for this to fail? And would it be more or less likely to fail in a 9.0 Earthquake and Tsunami?
Fukushima Reactor number one was built in 1970 correct? With the others following not long after that. These would be considered Generation II reactors right? Is Generation I just the early research reactors or are there commercial plants that are considered Generation I?
Thanks for any answers you can provide.