Also it's not even that important since the thing that would cause a global EMP blast of that strength would be enough to destroy live [sic] on this planet anyway.
EMP doesn't "destroy life", though the actual effects of an EMP burst -- the loss of electrical and electronic systems -- would kill a certain number of people indirectly, but far from "all life on the planet". And in any case, we were talking about limited nuclear exchange, which may not result in any EMP whatsoever, especially if the blasts were limited to surface targets.
Well then let's see how smart you are without googling. [lengthy list of irrelevant questions deleted] ...Your move mister expert.
You debate like a petulant child. None of your (very basic) questions are relevant to the point at hand. If I wished to descend into your "appeal to authority" fallacy, I'd note that I first solved the neutron transport equation in graduate school likely before you were even born. But the nice thing about facts is that they remain true, no matter who expresses them.
I'll repeat that fact. When discussing the effects of a limited nuclear exchange on civilian nuclear plants, Japan's Fukushima accident is a far more representative worst-case scenario than Chernobyl. The Great East Japan earthquake was the strongest ever recorded in the country, and the resultant tsunami directly killed 18,000 people and destroyed the backup power and cooling systems at Fukushima. What then? Zero people died of acute radiation sickness, and only a small handful of workers actually working onsite at the plant itself received radiation doses that significantly raised their long-term chances of contracting cancer.
Chernobyl's reactors were of a type never built in the West: they lacked concrete containment sarcophagi entirely, and all maintained a positive void coefficient. A Chernobyl-style accident simply cannot occur in a Western LWR. Furthermore-- even if it did-- Chernobyl was not nearly as bad as media accounts portrayed it. Had the Soviets not tried to cover up the accident (locals were still fishing in Chernobyl's cooling pond for several days
after the meltdown) and simply immediately evacuated residents and issued iodine pills, no one whatsoever would have died, excluding those few workers unlucky enough to have actually been inside the facility. Most people don't realize that, despite the media myth of a hyper-irradiated zone around Chernobyl and the town of Priapyat, the other three reactors at Chernobyl remained in operation -- with workers showing up every day -- for a full decade after the accident.
But again-- that's all irrelevant. A Chernobyl-style meltdown cannot occur in the West. We never built RBMK reactors-- for good reason.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram