Ok, due to popular demand..

went into the NRC site and just read all the daily reports with event dates for 1/1-1/6 for each year (and noted "close but no cigars", 12/31 and 01/07

2000: Two shutdowns 1/1-1/6, one shutdown 12/31

1999: Three shutdowns 1/1-1/6, one shutdown 12/31

1998: One shutdown 1/1-1/6

1997: One shutdown 1/1-1/6, one shutdown 1/7

Keep in mind the dangers of small sample size; I think a long-termn average per week is better but no way am I reading ALL those reports.

The reports had numerous "glitches" that were not shutdowns in each of the years.

-- John H Krempasky (johnk@dmv.com), January 06, 2000

Answers

John....PLEASE take your dryer apart!

-- Swampthing (in@the.swamp), January 06, 2000.

So what's wrong with him providing those figures, Swampthing? Set aside whatever rhetoric has been tossed around, keep in mind John's note about small sample size, and what we have is what a lot of us have been asking for -- some long term figures with which to draw some informed comparisons to. That, I think, isn't worth the sniping on your part.

-- Ned Raggett (ned@kuci.org), January 06, 2000.

Ned how do you know this isn't fradulant?

Go to the thread you started this on and see me response you terd!!!

-- Johnny (jljtm@bellsouth.net), January 06, 2000.

I'll try to answer your question in a straightforward manner here, Johnny, though I have my doubts you'll care -- given Mr. K has clearly said he went to the NRC site, that right there is an invitation for *anyone* to go to the NRC site to compare what he found. If he could provide that direct link, that'd be cool. As it is, Johnny, I don't think I'd care to review your other post if that's yer attitude...

-- Ned Raggett (ned@kuci.org), January 06, 2000.

http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/DAILY/psr.htm

It is here.

-- Jim (waiting@aol.com), January 06, 2000.

coward

-- Johnny (jljtm@bellsouth.net), January 06, 2000.

As it happened, I was reviewing some other threads from earlier and came across your complaint by accident there, Johnny. I was unclear in my language in a post, leading you to think that of course I was a tool of the Man and that I was representative of a mindset willing to hand over my country to big bad scary people, if not an active collaborator. I have to say, I am amused to see that you can derive this from one grammatical slip. Yours is the reasonable mind I trust in this whole matter.

-- Ned Raggett (ned@kuci.org), January 06, 2000.

John:

I see that some here have given you their complete faith. Most of us will need more of your patience, though.

On Dec 31st 99, 3 US Nuclear Reactors were reported by Reuters to go offline. That, plus your 2 cited makes 5. It has at least the appearence of a convenient action on your part to present data in such a way as to ignore the 3 plants that [preemtively?] just went offline on the 31st of Dec 99. Also, do you have independent media confirmation of the NRC statistics? Preferably in print, just to quell any doubts. I know this is a lot to ask, but you're trying to win our, and the general public's trust.

-- tim phronesia (phronesia@webtv.net), January 06, 2000.

Tim:

John isn't trying to win anybody's trust. He has presented figures that are available to anyone that wants to go to the NRC web site. If you think he's slanting the data, go there, get the data, and give us your version.

Jim

-- Jim Cooke (JJCooke@yahoo.com), January 06, 2000.

Tim...

No deliberate attempt to hide them, People seemed to care about things since the rollover.

And it wasn't three on 12/31, it was 2 on 12/30 and 1 on 12/31.

And as I note in the other thread where you brought it up, of the 3 2 of them had a pretty obvious cause and it was the sort of thing (two wires shorting, insulation failing) where it's rather hard to attribute it to Y2K.

-- John H Krempasky (johnk@dmv.com), January 07, 2000.

OH MY GOD! DO YOU KNOW WHAT THIS MEANS? IT MEANS THAT THINGS ACTUALLY WENT WRONG BEFORE Y2K, AND THEREFORE THINGS GOING WRONG NOW MIGHT ACTUALLY HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH EITHER Y2K PROBLEMS OR EVIL GOVERNMENT/BUSINESS CONSPIRACIES TO COVER UP THE PROBLEMS! I MEAN, LOOK AT THE NUMBERS! 1999 WAS NOT ONLY AS BAD, IT WAS WORSE! DID WE ALRADY HAVE TEOTWAWKI LAST YEAR AND NOBODY TOLD ME?

Nawwww, that couldn't be it.

-- Paul Neuhardt (neuhardt@ultranet.com), January 07, 2000.