home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!wupost!emory!gatech!destroyer!cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca!access.usask.ca!herald.usask.ca!hardie
- From: hardie@herald.usask.ca (Peter Hardie,4805)
- Newsgroups: sci.energy
- Subject: Re: Nuclear Power and Climate Change
- Date: 1 Jan 1993 16:08:59 GMT
- Organization: University of Saskatchewan
- Lines: 22
- Message-ID: <1i1qarINN4u7@access.usask.ca>
- References: <C057yB.6Dw@encore.com>
- Reply-To: hardie@herald.usask.ca
- NNTP-Posting-Host: herald.usask.ca
- Originator: hardie@herald.usask.ca
-
- From article <C057yB.6Dw@encore.com>, by wcarroll@encore.com (William Carroll):
- > stead@skadi.CSS.GOV (Richard Stead) writes:
- >
- >>No comparison. Containment structures are designed to withstand the strongest
- >>tornadoes - a mere typhoon would simply give the plant a nice bath.
- >> Just
- >>look at some of the stuff our last big hurricane did in Florida. That's
- >>exactly what a typhoon does.
- >
- > You mean, like knocking the Turkey Point nuclear plant offline for several
- > weeks? That's one hell of a bath!
- If you had read the news correctly you would know that the hurricane did not
- damage the nuclear power plant at all. It was taken off line as a precaution
- during the storm. The damage was done to a nearby coal-fired plant (one of the
- stacks was damaged?). After being taken off-line, the Turkey Point plant could
- not get permission to start up again for some time because of concerns about
- the ability to evacuate the nearby population if an emergency occurred at the
- plant (i.e. the existing emergency evacuation plans would have been difficult
- to carry out with the debris from the storm impeding people's ability to get
- out of the area).
-
- Pete hardie@herald.usask.ca
-