<p>
[quote]
This dude appears to be an EXPERT on pornography and he's RADIOACTIVE too!
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It's not that difficult to understand the difference between soft and hard core.</p>
<p>Ah, the 'ol radioactive thing. Yes, the uninformed tend to say things like that. Actually, I had a total of 2 mrem of radiation while working there, which is well below background for anywhere in the country. I'm not sure I understand where the post came from, somehow implying that my job was, perhaps, not up to your standards?</p>
<p>It's funny how people (in general) react to the idea of working in or around a nuclear reactor.</p>
<p>"Don't you get RADIATION?" :eek:</p>
<p>Unreal. Ignorance on parade.</p>
<p>In my time aboard nuclear submarines, I received less radiation in 10 weeks than I would have sunning myself on the beach for a day. I imagine the civilian plants aren't much different.</p>
<p>It's sad, because such ignorance (fueled by the warnings by such emminent nuclear physicists as Jane Fonda :rolleyes: ) has left us even MORE dependant on fossil fuels and nutcases like Chavez to deal with. I can onlly imagine what modern reactor designs are like in terms of both safety and efficiency.</p>
<p>Well, we haven't really built a new reactor since the 70s, so they're far from modern in design. However, they're constantly upgraded, and the safety margins are ridiculous, and we spend a TON of money making sure absolutely nothing can happen. Every refueling outage we upgrade our designs, both in terms of safety margin, and efficiency and ease of use. </p>
<p>They also release less radiation than a coal power plant, which most people find shockingly interesting.</p>
<p>Navy designs are probably pretty cool, plus you don't have to deal with all the civilian BS like we did, so you can just use them to create power like they were meant to, isntead of creating controversy.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Navy designs are probably pretty cool, plus you don't have to deal with all the civilian BS like we did, so you can just use them to create power like they were meant to, isntead of creating controversy.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Try pulling a nuke ship into such clueless places as New Zealand and see how wrong you are.</p>
<p>You'll also discover that Navy Reactors are twice as anal as any civilian reactor. Rickover covered all the bases, and the legend lives on. Of course, that's the reason Navy has had almost NO major reactor accidents all these many years.</p>
<p>Yup, and civilian reactors in the U.S. have had no major releases of radiation in their history. Three Mile Island (TMI) was technically "close" to having to rely on containment and containment cooling systems to do their jobs, but it would've held by all design parameters. Plus, after TMI, many changes were instituted (millions upon millions upon millions of dollars) to get rid of some of those points of failure.</p>