• 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.