User talk:NRC OPA

Welcone to Wikipedia - thanks for providing this public service. Ottawahitech (talk) 17:47, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Query your knowledge might solve

Dear Sir/Madam

I am attempting to update the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster page and wish to corroborate or dismiss suggestions that I've heard and read to the effect that: Had reactors 1-3 not entered a SCRAM after the earthquake(as legally required), then in all likelihood they could have continued to power their own cooling pumps, irrespective of any damage that might have then been caused to the back-up diesel generators. As the turbine buildings were capable of generating electricity from the reactors on their own.

I find this a seductive line of reasoning however I am skeptical that the turbine building/electricity generation systems were still in working order after the tsunami.

I have also posted this to the above talk page, and would appreciate if you respond there.

Boundarylayer (talk) 11:47, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fukushima

Citation for what but EPR can be linked to EPR (nuclear reactor) and for there I have a good data table to be translated not easy for a german from de:Areva_EPR#Datentabellen with 1 own correction from uranium to plutonium mixed oxide matching with datas inside table

I'm writing since long time in english Wikipedia never as admin always in war with blockers.

Long time ago also entries for Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster adding tables, text and charts 100 times deleted until left and taken care by others for long time by others here.

Added charts Radiation measurements from Fukushima Prefecture, March 2011 Seawater-contamination along coast with Caesium-137, from 21 March until 5 etc.

100 times exchange of wrong word radiation release with right contamination. Last 3 tables are own adding at Comparison of Fukushima and Chernobyl nuclear accidents

etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.183.104.231 (talk) 13:38, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]