Talk:Nuclear safety in the United States

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Nuclear safety in the United States article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 60 days

Energy Low‑importance

	Energy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Science Policy B‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Policy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science policy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science PolicyWikipedia:WikiProject Science PolicyTemplate:WikiProject Science PolicyScience Policy articles
B	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Beyond Design Basis Events and Plagiarism[edit]

The article states:

As the Fukushima I nuclear accidents showed, external threats — such as earthquakes, tsunamis, fires, flooding, tornadoes and terrorist attacks — are some of the greatest risk factors for a serious nuclear accident. Yet, nuclear plant operators have normally considered these 'beyond design basis events' so unlikely that they have not built in complete safeguards.[30]

Two issues with this passage. First, the first sentence is a plagiarized direct quote from the source, and the second sentence is an incorrect paraphrase of the source.

Design Basis Events (DBEs) are a set of conditions that a structure is expected to survive (and in the case of a nuclear power plant, prevent a release of nuclear material). For example, a nuclear plant built on a fault line might have a DBE that expects it to withstand a 9.0 magnitude earthquake, while a nuclear plant built on a coastline might have as a DBE to withstand hurricane force winds and rainfall. The events at Fukushima exceeded the design basis for the plant (the plant was designed for a 5.7m tsunami and was hit by a 13-14m tsunami and then by an earthquake that exceeded the design basis ground acceleration by about 1m/s^2).

The way the article is phrased now, it makes it sound like nuclear plant operators don't plan for earthquakes, tsunamis, fires, flooding, tornadoes, or terrorist attacks. The exact opposite is true- they do plan for them, but they use available data to determine exactly what to plan for- Do they build a nuclear plant to withstand a 9.0 magnitude earthquake, or a 6.0 magnitude earthquake? Do they plan for a 14m tsunami, or a 6m tsunami? The point of the article is not that plant operators don't account for these external events, the point is that since Fukushima they're re-evaluating their circumstances to ensure that their DBE's are in fact adequate for their situations.

Given that, and given the plagiarism, I am editing this immediately to read: The Fukushima I nuclear accident was caused by a "beyond design basis event," the tsunami and associated earthquakes were more powerful than the plant was designed to accomodate, and the accident is directly due to the tsunami overflowing the too-low seawall. Since then, the possibility of unforeseen beyond design basis events has been a major concern for plant operators. 128.252.20.193 (talk) 22:30, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, the accident was not "directly due to the tsunami overflowing the too-low seawall". The disaster involved a complex interaction of factors, see Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster#Cascade of failures and Normal accidents. Johnfos (talk) 06:44, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Nuclear safety in the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:13, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]