• BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      Why?

      It had a proper “fail-safe” incident. It functioned as intended.

      • superkret
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        3 months ago

        They intended for it to partially melt down?

        • ArxCyberwolf@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Don’t twist their words. The plant, when faced with a meltdown incident, was able to shut down safely with no injuries or detrimental effects to anyone, as intended. The plant then operated safely without incident for another 4 decades.