[pchelpers] off topic: WTC
- From: "Ekhart GEORGI (last name last)" <Ekhart.GEORGI@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: pchelpers@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 10:24:48 +0300
Hi Scott
> Nuclear plants: "When the plants were designed, large aircrafts that
> are presently used were not in use"
>
> http://www.attackonamerica.net/jetcouldwrecknuclearnrcadmits.htm
But they wouldn't have survived a frontal hit even by a contemporary
airplane, and it also says the following which was true right from the
start:
"The agency also acknowledged that critical systems that provide
cooling, electricity and storage of spent fuel are mostly in nonhardened
buildings that could not withstand an aircraft or missile attack." (or
accident! -- my addition)
(By the way, there's a good chance this reporter or the quoted NRC
spokeswoman also got some technical stuff wrong since one or both of
them don't even know basic tools of their trade like the plural of
"aircraft")
WTC:
> proves the correctness of the original dynamic design. What was not
> considered in design was the temperature that can develop in the
> ensuing fire."
That's what i meant with it being incredible that the "experts" didn't
"remember" that planes have fuel tanks and behave differently than water
tanks.
The first situation shows a clear and the second a probable flagrant
disregard of safety for very obvious reason: to be able to save money
while lying to the population about it. Nuclear power plants would
simply be too expensive to build if they were made safe. And architects
are one of the few professions left which still require Renaissance
people, even though most of the power to decide has been given to the
engineers. So even if the responsible engineers honestly forgot about
what an airplane's fuel tank would do, i'm pretty sure that at least the
architect knew his building wouldn't even survive a contemporary plane,
and he probably had/has a very bad conscience about keeping his mouth shut.
By the way, such a decision to make public or not something dangerous or
unjust is a good example of a personal decision that is political
irregardless of which choice one makes.
Ek
-------list-services-below-----------
Regards, John Durham (list moderator) <http://modecideas.com/contact.html?sig>
Freelists login at //www.freelists.org/cgi-bin/lsg2.cgi
List archives at //www.freelists.org/archives/pchelpers
PC-HELPERS list subscribe/unsub at http://modecideas.com/discuss.htm?sig
Latest news live feeds at http://modecideas.com/indexhomenews.htm?sig
Good advice is like good paint- it only works if applied.
Other related posts:
