An improper comparison, as the Soviet RBMK-style reactor had no shielding.. unlike the Japanese reactors. Moreover, they were shown to have cut any and all safety protocols in the course of daily operation.
A more apt comparison would be "3 Mile Island" which was a pressurized water reactor of similar design to the Japanese model. In both cases, the radiation release was minimal.
It is also important to note that the Japanese nuclear reactors had only their primary cooling system fail due to the earthquake. The secondary system snapped in exactly as it ought. The diesel generators failed when they were flooded by the Tsunami.
The failure in design was not with the reactor, but with the secondary power supply; they clearly did not take enough precautions isolating the diesel generators from any and all disturbances. They could easily have adapted a strategy not unlike what we used for diesel submarines in order to provide secondary power; instead, they went with a strategy not unlike the 'boxcar'.. a diesel engine stuck in a box alongside the facility or thereabouts.
no subject
A more apt comparison would be "3 Mile Island" which was a pressurized water reactor of similar design to the Japanese model. In both cases, the radiation release was minimal.
It is also important to note that the Japanese nuclear reactors had only their primary cooling system fail due to the earthquake. The secondary system snapped in exactly as it ought. The diesel generators failed when they were flooded by the Tsunami.
The failure in design was not with the reactor, but with the secondary power supply; they clearly did not take enough precautions isolating the diesel generators from any and all disturbances. They could easily have adapted a strategy not unlike what we used for diesel submarines in order to provide secondary power; instead, they went with a strategy not unlike the 'boxcar'.. a diesel engine stuck in a box alongside the facility or thereabouts.