Blah, blah. Keen gets her digs in on the stand.
The only thing new was this 1 in 1000 thing of fuel failure, but I don't really think the pump replacements changed this probability. If the chance of fuel failure is 100% with a major earthquake, then those odds are like 1 in 100 per year.
2 comments:
Also the coment that " 1,000 times higher than the international standard of one in a million " gives one pause. The reactor is still operating at this alarming level of potential danger a fact that has got to cause increased fear and anxiety in a public that is about to have the prospect of new and refurbished nuclear power plants comming on line being regulated by Toadies.
A question about the odds vs time, if the chance of an event is 1 in 100 per year is it the same as 1 in 36,500 per day?
Yes, as you shorten the time span, the odds become more remote. We used this a lot in the nuclear biz, when putting up some temporary supports, or taking off a backup pump for a short time.
Like I said, nobody mentions whether these terrible odds have improved at all. The Toadies say that it's 'as safe as ever'. However, I think Keen just stuck to this pump thing as a 'last straw', and it might not have been that significant in itself.
Post a Comment