[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 135 KB, 1024x800, SolarSuperstorm-1024x800.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11354387 No.11354387 [Reply] [Original]

> About Sun Storms
https://share.dmca.gripe/lD4HehVXi9KNQnxW.webm

> New Studies Warn of Cataclysmic Solar Superstorms
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new-studies-warn-of-cataclysmic-solar-superstorms/

> We’re Overdue For The 150-year Carrington Event
https://www.gaia.com/article/carrington-event

> 1 in 8 Chance of Catastrophic Solar Megastorm by 2020
https://www.wired.com/2012/02/massive-solar-flare/

>> No.11354399

Is the southern hemisphere safer?

>> No.11354474

finaly, cant wait for this shite to end

>> No.11354529

It would fuck up nuclear reactors worldwide.

>> No.11355696

>>11354529
That's pretty spoopy. Imagine all the radiation from all the meltdowns.

>> No.11356752

>>11354529
pretty sure those are all radiation proof

>> No.11356824

Hopefully we'll have some warning and can accommodate

>> No.11357910

>>11356752
Nuclear reactors are not safe from solar flares at all. All the safety systems would would get FUBAR'd. The reactors would go into meltdowns and there would be no way to save them.

Some random articles on the topic:

http://archive.is/23Ccn
http://archive.is/QeWZH
http://archive.is/W6TlK
http://archive.is/7wZjv

>> No.11357922

>>11357910
>deep green resistance news

>> No.11358639
File: 152 KB, 1300x1279, 1578748303059.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11358639

>>11357922

>> No.11358645

>>11354387
> About Sun Storms
Literally Varg. You're an idiot.
>gaia.com
>wired.com
Nice "sources" you've got there, you really convinced me!

>> No.11359298

>>11354387
>> We’re Overdue For The 150-year Carrington Event
>not grasping return periods

>> No.11359601

>>11354387
By putting a couple of big fat resistors to ground at strategic places in the grid we could prevent the problem entirely. NERC Also says that it's unlikely that a solar storm would take out the whole grid, which is the problem with geomagnetic storms. There'd be blackouts and some damage, but overall the grid's going back up.
>>11357910
>>11357922

The NRC told the NERC to shove that report up their ass and said fuck it let's consider the worst case scenario anyway. Problem is keeping the spent fuel and reactor cool for a long period of time. If the grid goes down they can't import power to run cooling and plants only have 7 days worth of fuel for diesel generators. In a big disaster even getting that diesel in could be problematic. Supposedly some new regs that came out in September address this though

>> No.11359648

>>11354399
yes, but only because it's less technologically advanced

>> No.11359649

>>11359601
Don't we have the ability to use passive failsafes that activate only when they lose power, such as a heavy bulkhead that naturally falls when not powered.

>> No.11360931

>>11359649
nuclear reactors need to be actively cooled even when they aren't generator power as do the spent fuel pools

>> No.11361166

https://discord.gg/FFwRXKq

>> No.11361310

>>11359649
>>11360931

The salt plugs in MSR designs would completely address this total failure scenario

>> No.11361655
File: 67 KB, 499x392, F550EF01-C77E-465D-BE09-1861128222E2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11361655

>>11354387
is this suppose to be “bad”?

>> No.11361845

>>11360931
No-in a situation like this, you could if all else fails disable the reactor 3ntirely and remove the fuel.

>> No.11361904

>>11361845
spent fuel has to be kept cool because of decay heat
>>11361310
There are other more practical reactor designs with passive safety, it's just that the reactors we have today aren't passively safe