Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

JohnyCanuck

(9,922 posts)
27. Fukushima and our inability to gauge risk
Sun Jan 5, 2014, 11:12 PM
Jan 2014
by Kurt Cobb, Resource Insights Blog

snip

Nuclear power plants are one of the most complex systems ever devised by humans. Complex systems by their very nature have more failure points than simple systems. But this in and of itself is not the problem. Natural systems such as the ocean currents or a rainforest are exceedingly complex. But, they have been around for much longer and their processes have settled into much more predictable patterns. With nuclear power plants, we have little experience to go on in evaluating risks.

Man-made systems not only have much shorter histories to work from, but they can interact with natural systems in unpredictable ways. Recall what happened at the Fukushima nuclear plant: The tsunami was so high that it breached the plant's seawall, flooding emergency diesel generators located in basements, generators that were supposed to power pumps to cool the reactor core and fuel rods in the event of a power outage. Backup batteries for those pumps ran out of power within a day. And, that's when the trouble began that led to hydrogen explosions which damaged buildings--damage that ultimately compromised the fuel rod storage.

Let me quote from an earlier piece of mine, "Calculating calamity: Japan's nuclear accident and the 'antifragile' alternative":

Famed student of risk and probability and author of The Black Swan Nassim Nicholas Taleb tells us that in 2003 Japan's nuclear safety agency set as a goal that fatalities resulting from radiation exposure to civilians living near any nuclear installation in Japan should be no more than one every million years. Eight years after that goal was adopted, it looks like it will be exceeded and perhaps by quite a bit, especially now that radiation is showing up in food and water near the stricken Fukushima Dai-ichi plant. (Keep in mind that "fatalities" refers not just to immediate deaths but also to excess cancer deaths due to radiation exposure which can take years and even decades to show up.)

Taleb writes that it is irresponsible to ask people to rely on the calculation of small probabilities for man-made systems since these probabilities are almost impossible to calculate with any accuracy. (To read his reasoning, see entry 142 on the notebook section of his website entitled "Time to understand a few facts about small probabilities [criminal stupidity of statistical science].&quot ....Calculations for man-made systems that result in incidents occurring every million years should be dismissed on their face as useless.

Furthermore, he notes, models used to calculate such risk tend to underestimate small probabilities. What's worse, the consequences are almost always wildly underestimated as well.

http://resourceinsights.blogspot.com/2013/10/fukushima-and-our-inability-to-gauge.html

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Canada Busted Covering Up Spikes In Fukushima Radiation mitty14u2 Jan 2014 #1
Duct Tape is a WONDERFUL thing..... GatorOrange Jan 2014 #2
K&R DeSwiss Jan 2014 #3
Thank you for that. One of the places I have looked at is the jtuck004 Jan 2014 #5
From what I've seen debunkthis Jan 2014 #18
Thank you. n/t jtuck004 Jan 2014 #19
I wonder how it reacts with the mercury and other elements blowing over? jtuck004 Jan 2014 #4
I want to see another source on this. longship Jan 2014 #6
I do too. I don't mind RT so much but washingtonblogs is crap. OTOH.....Run Away!!!! NYC_SKP Jan 2014 #8
I watch RT on MHz Worldview on occasion. longship Jan 2014 #10
My impression is that RT is not an appropriate source from LBN davidpdx Jan 2014 #15
Probably not the USA. longship Jan 2014 #16
They did not learn from our mistakes, evidently: Jefferson23 Jan 2014 #7
It never stops does it? blackspade Jan 2014 #9
A super ditto! SoapBox Jan 2014 #11
Not even on DU Demeter Jan 2014 #12
That's good, Demeter RobertEarl Jan 2014 #28
Yes, but wind turbines are so unsightly. valerief Jan 2014 #13
I have no doubt that there are so serious problems at Fukushima davidpdx Jan 2014 #14
Fukushima Radiation a Serious Threat to North American Coast mitty14u2 Jan 2014 #17
I understand. But your source is not the Guardian in the UK. It is Liberty Voice of NV. As to the freshwest Jan 2014 #20
IAEA Fukushima Daiichi Status Reports mitty14u2 Jan 2014 #23
I am waiting for Turner Network to Annouce the first KAIJU attack yuiyoshida Jan 2014 #21
I'm not surprised heaven05 Jan 2014 #22
You have got to be shitting me Scairp Jan 2014 #24
All the brains in the world and no common sense! mitty14u2 Jan 2014 #25
Fukushima Govt. & Fukushima Medical University Signed Secrecy Pact With IAEA mitty14u2 Jan 2014 #26
Fukushima and our inability to gauge risk JohnyCanuck Jan 2014 #27
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»‘Duct tape, wire nets’ we...»Reply #27