[GPSCC-chat] [Fwd: [Fwd: Update: Japan nuclear crisis takes turn for worse/take action]]

[Spencer Graves]

       Nuclear proponents might rebut Cameron's statement by claiming 
that WPPSS defaulted because the irrational concerns of 
environmentalists drove up their costs unnecessarily.


       Cameron's analysis is strengthened by an understanding of "normal 
accidents", also called "system accidents"(a):  In brief, it is humanly 
impossible to manage any complex system to ultra-high levels of 
reliability, because people learn that the system still functions 
without the redundant safety systems.  As a result, the safety systems 
are not maintained properly and warnings may be overridden.  If my 
memory is correct, engineers overrode warnings at both Three Mile Island 
and Chernobyl.  In Fukushima, the backup safety systems failed.  I heard 
a nuclear industry representative say that Fukushima was built in 1971, 
and more modern facilities have better safety systems.  However, the 
documented history of "normal accidents" indicates that the "better 
safety systems" in more modern plants may not get the inspection & 
maintenance they need to actually function when needed -- like the welds 
in PG&E's gas pipeline in San Mateo.  Inspection costs money, etc.


       For me, the record of  "normal accidents" is the key to resolving 
this debate -- as Cameron has otherwise eloquently outlined.


       Spencer


(a) Wikipedia, "System Accident" 
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_accident)



On 3/15/2011 4:25 PM, Cameron L. Spitzer wrote:
> For the last 25 years, a mutual fund manager could get fired
> for suggesting his fund invest in a nuke fission power plant.
> The defacto moratorium began not with any enviro groups'
> lawsuit nor any safety disaster.  It was the WPPSS bond default
> that killed nuke fission in the US.  That's because nuke fission
> is wildly expensive compared to any other widely deployed
> prime mover, and only *seems* cost-competitive when huge public
> subsidies are hidden.  WPPSS failed to secure the usual
> subsidies, and its investors lost everything.  Nuclear power
> isn't just unsafe, it's a collossal scam!
>
> The big public subsidy in the US is the Price Anderson Act
> liability cap.  Without that, no nuke fission operator can
> afford insurance.  All it would take to kill nuke fission in
> the US permanently would be to repeal Price Anderson.
>
> I believe that's where activists should focus.  Safety
> arguments are vulnerable because people don't know how to
> assess risk rationally, so they become uninformed, nonsensical
> shouting matches.  So you don't convince anyone who wasn't
> already on your side.  Safety arguments preach to the choir.
> But when you argue cost, you sound like you know what you're
> talking about and you can convince people who are proud of
> their skepticism.
>
> -Cameron
>
> _______________________________________________
> sosfbay-discuss mailing list
> sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org
> http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss
>
>


-- 
Spencer Graves, PE, PhD
President and Chief Operating Officer
Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc.
751 Emerson Ct.
San José, CA 95126
ph:  408-655-4567