/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #11354387

135KiB, 1024x800, SolarSuperstorm-1024x800.jpg

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

New Studies Warn of Cataclysmic Solar Superstorms

Anonymous Sun 02 Feb 15:57:53 2020 No.11354387 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>11358645 >>11359298 >>11359601 >>11361655

> 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/

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Feb 2020 16:01:29 No.11354399 Report

Quoted By: >>11359648

Is the southern hemisphere safer?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Feb 2020 16:40:26 No.11354474 Report

Quoted By:

finaly, cant wait for this shite to end

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Feb 2020 17:02:53 No.11354529 Report

Quoted By: >>11355696 >>11356752

It would fuck up nuclear reactors worldwide.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Feb 2020 00:39:29 No.11355696 Report

Quoted By:

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

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Feb 2020 11:08:50 No.11356752 Report

Quoted By: >>11357910

>>11354529
pretty sure those are all radiation proof

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Feb 2020 12:15:28 No.11356824 Report

Quoted By:

Hopefully we'll have some warning and can accommodate

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Feb 2020 22:18:43 No.11357910 Report

Quoted By: >>11357922 >>11359601

>>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

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Feb 2020 22:27:19 No.11357922 Report

Quoted By: >>11358639 >>11359601

>>11357910
>deep green resistance news

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1578748303059.jpg, 152KiB, 1300x1279

Anonymous Tue 04 Feb 2020 04:50:17 No.11358639 Report

Quoted By:

>>11357922

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Feb 2020 04:55:05 No.11358645 Report

Quoted By:

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

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Feb 2020 15:40:35 No.11359298 Report

Quoted By:

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

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Feb 2020 18:32:17 No.11359601 Report

Quoted By: >>11359649

>>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

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Feb 2020 19:07:11 No.11359648 Report

Quoted By:

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

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Feb 2020 19:07:47 No.11359649 Report

Quoted By: >>11360931 >>11361310

>>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.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Feb 2020 05:51:07 No.11360931 Report

Quoted By: >>11361310 >>11361845

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

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Feb 2020 08:59:07 No.11361166 Report

Quoted By:

https://discord.gg/FFwRXKq

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Feb 2020 11:10:16 No.11361310 Report

Quoted By: >>11361904

>>11359649
>>11360931

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

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO F550EF01-C77E-465D-BE09-18611282 (...).jpg, 67KiB, 499x392

Anonymous Wed 05 Feb 2020 15:21:29 No.11361655 Report

Quoted By:

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

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Feb 2020 16:37:29 No.11361845 Report

Quoted By: >>11361904

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

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Feb 2020 17:11:54 No.11361904 Report

Quoted By:

>>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

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches