臺灣位處地震帶上，還蓋這麼多核能電廠，臺灣人都不怕死嗎?

iitsunny Chen

5分

151樓

iitsunny Chen

個人積分：5分

文章編號：42402719

initail wrote:
整理一下最近登場的內...(恕刪)

針對您得第四點,您內容提到如下:
"4. 美國陸軍位於華頓近郊Fort Belvoir反大規模殺傷武器作戰署US Army Combating Weapon for Mass Destruction Agency (USACWMD)為證實新型ABWR即使遭恐怖份子破壞或劫持，也不致輻射洩漏傷人無數，找台灣幫忙。用與核四相同的設計，在美軍軍營裡培訓。美軍認證核四反恐超強大。"

網站上原文如下:
"Can a nuclear power plant become a weapon of mass destruction by accident or sabotage? Well, the highly radioactive core and spent fuel inventory is hazardous if released to the environment on a large scale. The possibility cannot be ruled out so that the US Army Combating WMD Agency (USACWMD) has acquired two of our basic simulator modules - one PWR and one BWR to train its staff. A training course will cover all possible accidents and their impact to public safety."

我英文能力不好,但內容怎麼找都找不到認證,也找不到找台灣幫忙,只找到該公司好像賣這軟體給人家做模擬用>.........

initail

38分

152樓

initail

個人積分：38分

文章編號：42403243

iitsunny Chen wrote:
針對您得第四點,您內...(恕刪)

你問了一個超過我能處理的問題耶...

這些傢伙用掃描檔...請給我五個小時

http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/design-cert/abwr.html#ser

NRC Safety Evaluation Report

NUREG-1503, "Final Safety Evaluation Report Related to the Certification of the Advanced Boiling-Water Reactor Design"
NUREG-1503, Supplement 1, "Final Safety Evaluation Report Related to Certification of the Advanced Boiling-Water Reactor Design"

http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML0806/ML080670592.html

iitsunny Chen

5分

153樓

iitsunny Chen

個人積分：5分

文章編號：42404463

initail wrote:
你問了一個超過我能處...(恕刪)

我想,你的資料應該介定為ABWR這種機組的優勢,因為我看您貼的網站資料
該報告名稱
"Final Safety Evaluation Report Related to the Certification of the Advanced Boiling Water Reactor Design, Main Report,"
看老外的文件,第一件事就是要看"abstract"摘要,這是很重要的習慣,由其是看報告,文獻等,這點與我們習慣不同
你的文件摘要:
(1997)

(1994)

我不認為,這份文件事是在說明台灣的核四是安全的,或可幫台灣的核四背書,或是該模擬軟體是非常好的,可通過認證等等云云

充其量,這份些文件只能說明,ABWR 在安全上,與技術可被運用並通過相關核能法規認證過

我建議援引本份文件,"不要有認證","台灣人幫忙","美軍反恐",等字眼擴大解讀,這報告的用途不是這樣用的

initail wrote:
你問了一個超過我能處...(恕刪)

initail

38分

154樓

initail

個人積分：38分

文章編號：42404945

iitsunny Chen wrote:
我建議援引本份文件,"不要有認證","台灣人幫忙","美軍反恐",等字眼擴大解讀,這報告的用途不是這樣用的

好的，那我承認無法辨識是否有台灣人協助進行測試，其成績是否與台灣人有關無法確認。

那....我剛看那麼用力是爲了什麼....

第九節以前的報告
http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML0806/ML080670560.pdf

飛彈 (3.5章)
For the prediction of local damage from missiles, GE
provided, in SSAR Amendment 32, information on the
procedures used in the design of concrete and steel
structures. GE applied the empirical equations such as the
modified Petry formula or U.S. Army Technical Manual
TM 5-855-1 formula analytically for missile protection in
concrete. The staff finds that use of the Petry formula or
U.S. Army Technical Manual TM 5-855-1 formula, as
verified by impact tests, and with the thickness equal to or
greater than the minimum required as specified for
Region II listed in Table 1 of SRP Section 3.5.3 will result
in sufficient concrete barrier thickness to prevent barrier
perforation and, when necessary, prevent spalling or
scabbing. This is acceptable.

淹水(2.4章)
The COL applicant should provide site-specific information
on historical flooding and potential flooding at the plant
site, including flood history, flood design considerations,
and effects of local intense precipitation. This was DFSER
COL Action Item 2.4.2-1. GE has included this action
item in Section 2.3.2.12 of the SSAR. This is acceptable.

可以防得住其他東西的目錄：
Water Level (Flood) Design...................
3.4.1 Flood Protection.....................
3.4.2 Water Level (Flood) Design Procedure......
3.5 missiles................. o...............
3.5.1 Missile Selection and Description 3-20
3.5.2 Structures, Systems, and Components To Be Protected From
Externally Generated Missiles..........................
3.5.3 Barrier Design Procedures............................
3.6 Protection Against Dynamic Effects Associated With the Postulated Rupture
of Piping.............................................
3.6.1 Plant Design for Protection Against Postulated Piping Failure in
Fluid Systems Outside Containment......................
3.6.2 Determination of Rupture Locations and Dynamic Effects
Associated With the Postulated Rupture of Piping............
3.6.3 Leak-Before-Break Evaluation Procedures.................
3.7 Seismic Design...........................
3.7.1 Seismic Design Parameters.............
3.7.2 Seismic System Analysis...............
3.7.3 Seismic Subsystem Analysis.............
3.7.4 Seismic Instrumentation...............
3.8 Design of Seismic Category I Structures..........
3.8.1 Concrete Containment................
3.8.2 Steel Components of the Reinforced Concrete
3.8.3 Concrete and Steel Internal Structures of Steel
Containment.............
3.8.4 Other Seismic Category I Structures.......
3.8.5 Foundations.......................
3.8.6 Certified Design Material..............
3.9 Mechanical Systems and Components............
Containment.
or Concrete

如何第一次處理嚴重意外就上手
Response to Severe Accident Policy Statement
http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1112/ML11126A121.pdf

iitsunny Chen

5分

155樓

iitsunny Chen

個人積分：5分

文章編號：42405837

initail wrote:
好的，那我承認無法辨...(恕刪)

感謝你願意找出那麼多年前的報告,其實,您看的這些與貼出來的這些都代表"ABWR這種機組的優勢",也就是GE很負責任的在開發這些技術的同時,也邀請這麼多的單位,透過方法論與POC來驗證他的設計具備有相對應的安全性,這是很重要的!

但是,核四的問題如果套在這些報告中,是否能成立,這是很實際的問題,我一直想知道的是,就單純安全面來看,GE願意為他的技術保證,那GE願意為核四保證嗎?

也許可以節錄一些報告中的內容,請台電說明,當GE用這些驗證方法來保證時,我們的核四,是否能以同樣的方法來驗證!不過當然,只討論ABWR這爐子,全組進口,爐本身,GE應該會保證,但整合等議題,是我們現在沒辦法確認的因為目前就是說不明白呀!

這些只是純粹單純討論 ABWR 爐子的問題,但台電是要蓋電廠,不是要裝爐子,這比喻,有如我買BMW的引擎,然後自行組裝出一台車,BMW會願意給我貼他的牌嗎?這是可能,也是不可能的,全然取決在整體價值的展現!

臺灣位處地震帶上，還蓋這麼多核能電廠，臺灣人都不怕死嗎?

小惡魔新聞台

今日熱門文章 網友點擊推薦！

今日熱門文章　網友點擊推薦！