BWR Torus Venting Scam

work in progress

BWR Torus Venting Scam
Remember complexity drives the system towards the counter intuitive direction and we are really talking about a extremely complex outcome with a meltdown and large public release. I see the vent as a risk amplification tool...i think its intention was to be that tool.

Maybe a facility use amplification tool...a tool to cloak the true understanding and knowledge of risk. A risk understanding disrupter.

Right, risk is a calculation of the relative worth of the safety systems and the design of the system, defined by the corporation.

But total risk is the design the facility, and how we maintain and operate the facility, and the human-machine interactionm and how the world interactes with with the plant.

Right, we could collectively turn off all the safety systems, meltdown the reactor and destroy or bypass all the containment.

Right, our risk calculations don't capture this possible human machine interaction...I am trying to make the case that all risk is not captured in our corporate risk calculation. Actually, it carries a very narrow sector of risk and it doesn't capture chaos theory and complexity. It doesn't understand true complexity.

I think as you go down the road of complexity you reach a point where a out come is not predictable and unknowable. A risk amplification tool is one that replaces uncertainty with illusory certainty.

Somebody really predicted large scale human responses...the torus hard vent path wasn't designed to vent the torus. It was designed to increase facility capacity factor. Its sole purpose was to increase corporate profits and it was the cheapest capacity factor increaser ever invented. They knew we would default into the primitive model or incomplete model with how system worked.

...Ok, so if you turned off the hardened vent input into the PRA and risk calculation what would happen? It would change the behavior of plant operations and the plant structure itself? Everything changes. Basically the harden vent in risk calculation says there has been a overall reduction in the risk at the top of the risk hierarchy...thus we got a chunk of global risk reduction we can play with to bring risk back up to the orginal limit. A case may now be made where you can say we can work with less redundancy, the NRC interaction with a utility is reduced, we accept larger infraction with a utility. So that chunk of harden vent path risk reduction is filled back up to its original level with global risk increases.

I don't how this is get played out, do we trade one full meltdown for 10 half meltdowns down the line, certainly we trade up to more plant upsets and more severe plant accidents?

We fill in that chunk of harden vent risk reduction with running the plant harder and at a higher capacity factor...or running the plant in more risk?