So according to this headline, we have 31 reactors all on the Pacific coast? I don't think so. And none of the reactors follow the design of Fukushima in so far as I know. 3 Mile may have been a nightmare, but it did result in better standards and designs. I think if you poke around even a little bit that should be clear. Can't imagine why the article's writers didn't point that out. Now if you want to fantasize a bit, think about this: all of INEL rests squarely on a very large piece of basalt (with a frosting of lava) all of which came about the last time Yellowstone lost it's cool. Add to that the fact that there are a good deal more than just 31 reactors there (mostly deactivated) and you have the makings of a real party. Won't make a difference to me because if Yellowstone goes up again, I'm within the kill zone, but still...
You can't imagine until it happens. Think about possible worst result in that case, even just to get a few secs bonus from stunning when it really happens. In that sense, it is a good article to read.
8 comments
[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 22.7 ms ] threadBut seriously, the US has things like earthquakes, tornadoes, a supervolcano, hurricanes in the southeast, and random acts of god in the bible belt...
That’d be nasty.
The fear is a self fulfilling prophecy.