1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Nuclear meltdowns

Discussion in 'Civ4 - General Discussions' started by mcaber, May 26, 2009.

  1. mcaber

    mcaber Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2008
    Messages:
    71
    If nuclear meltdowns were as recurring in the real world as it is in civ we would have had something like 3 meltdowns in France, 10 in US, 20 in Russia etc by now.

    AFAIK there are only two known nuclear meltdowns in the real world, two mile island and Chernobyl. I might be wrong there however.
     
  2. mcaber

    mcaber Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2008
    Messages:
    71
    Ok, instead of just ranting, I actually checked the facts:

    A number of Russian nuclear submarines have experienced nuclear meltdowns. The only known large scale nuclear meltdowns at civilian nuclear power plants were in the Chernobyl disaster at Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant, Ukraine, in 1986, and the Three Mile Island accident at Three Mile Island, Pennsylvania, USA, in 1979, although there have been partial core meltdowns at:

    * NRX, Ontario, Canada, in 1952
    * EBR-I, Idaho, USA, in 1955
    * Windscale, Sellafield, England, in 1957 (see Windscale fire)
    * Santa Susana Field Laboratory, Simi Hills, California, in 1959
    * SL-1, Idaho, USA in 1961. (US military)
    * Enrico Fermi Nuclear Generating Station, Michigan, USA, in 1966
    * Chapelcross, Dumfries and Galloway, Scotland, in 1967
    * A1 plant at Jaslovské Bohunice, Czechoslovakia in 1977. 25% of the fuel elements in a heavy water moderated carbon dioxide cooled 100 MW(e) power reactor were damaged due to operator error. The operators failed to remove silica gel packs from a new fuel element. The silica gel was used to keep the unused fuel dry during storage and transport. The silica gel packs blocked the flow of the coolant resulting in overheating of the fuel and the pressure channel holding it. As a result of overheating the heavy water leaked into the part of the reactor where the fuel elements are accommodated, the cladding was subject to corrosion and a considerable amount of radioactivity leaked into the primary cooling circuit. Through leaks in the steam boilers (similar basic design to a MAGNOX or AGR plant) some parts of the secondary circuit became contaminated.[5]

    Not all of these were caused by a loss of coolant and in several cases (the Chernobyl disaster and the Windscale fire, for example) the meltdown was not the most severe problem.
     
  3. Ghpstage

    Ghpstage Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2009
    Messages:
    2,944
    Location:
    Bristol, England
    There are many threads discussing the ridiculousness of Nuclear Plant meltdowns already! :lol:
    In game your are far better off building coal plants as soon as they become available. They come earlier much than nuke plants or hydro plants, are cheaper than either and don't explode! The +2 :yuck: isn't that big an issue :goodjob:
     
  4. Bei1052

    Bei1052 Emperor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,460
    I didn't think anyone besides the AI builds nuclear plants.
     
  5. Blaarg

    Blaarg Prince

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2007
    Messages:
    519
    I've never seen a meltdown
     
  6. Shackel

    Shackel Still a Settler D:

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Messages:
    455
    None of these partial meltdowns, however, have caused a NUCLEAR EXPLOSION.
     
  7. Gustavus

    Gustavus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2008
    Messages:
    52
    Location:
    USA
    Agreed--instead of nuk-u-lar (couldn't resist) plants, just deal with the pollution, and just build coal plants.
     
  8. Ghpstage

    Ghpstage Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2009
    Messages:
    2,944
    Location:
    Bristol, England
    Build one plant and wait 10 turns :lol:
     
  9. mcaber

    mcaber Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2008
    Messages:
    71
    Well said.
     
  10. Shurdus

    Shurdus Am I Napoleon?

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2004
    Messages:
    2,301
    Location:
    Settle in place
    Lol, I never really bothered with the nukuculukuclar plants but I had no idea really that it would be this bad. I also have never seen a meltdown, not with me not with the AI.
     
  11. 6K Man

    6K Man Bureaucrat

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2007
    Messages:
    2,281
    Location:
    in a Gadda Da Vida
    Frankly, the extra cost and later availability vis-a-vis Coal Plants is enough of a disincentive to build them, never mind the meltdown risk.

    I fondly remember Civ2's meltdown scheme, where there was a practically automatic chance of a meltdown whenever a city went into civil unrest. So if you accidentally let your Democracy fall because of one forgotten unhappy person, you'd be spending the next 30 turns doing nothing with your Engineers but cleaning fallout... :lol:
     
  12. TheMeInTeam

    TheMeInTeam Top Logic

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    25,716
    The implementation of nuke plants in this game HAS to be a bad joke by somebody, maybe Al Gore got his hands on the programming or one of those people who literally cries when a tree dies perhaps.

    There have been precisely 0 civilian nuclear incidents that resulted in anything resembling the equivalent of a nuclear weapon, ever. So, why is it reasonably likely in one game with just a few plants? Hell, what's the effect even BASED ON? Why not have aliens come in with industrialism or something, too? It makes just as much sense.

    Then we have the limitation of the thing coming later than coal plants. Might as well make the crappier building available later, right? That's good for balance. Or maybe the tree fairy wanted to make sure we don't use them.

    A REALISTIC implementation would be an occurrence about 1/10 as frequently as now, with more minor side effects like 1 building destroyed and -1 pop.

    When a feature fails both "game balance" AND "realism" checks, you KNOW it's the Tree Fairy, although in some rare circumstances the evil intern is the culprit instead.
     
  13. Bob the Barbari

    Bob the Barbari Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2008
    Messages:
    233
    Location:
    One-tile island
    Considering the effects of Chernobyl accident -1 population would not be accurate. I think it should be -2 pop instantly, -1 pop every turn for the next 5 turns, no buildings destroyed, fallout spreading to all surrounding tiles, 2 :mad: in every city. It should also stop occuring after some high teh probably fussion is reaserched. Chance decreased and scaled with game speed.
     
  14. TheMeInTeam

    TheMeInTeam Top Logic

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    25,716
    No. The single worst meltdown in history is not a good measuring stick for an average meltdown. 2 :mad: in every city is extreme, and -2 pop instantly and -1 over 5 turns is a tremendous joke if you're trying to simulate reality. How many people died from Chernobyl? Millions? Even tens of thousands? Don't get me wrong, the death of a hefty number of people is a tragedy, but in terms of what 1 civ pop represents having the meltdown contribute to more than 1 is a gross over-exaggeration. Losing SEVEN pop? Here we go trying to mimic the effects of an actual warhead again!!! It was no where NEAR that.

    Also, we don't have fusion (well, a positive-energy version of a fusion reaction) today, but we haven't seen a meltdown in quite some time. Ecology, which also grants the ability to scrub fallout, makes sense in terms of the timeframe where nuke plants realistically would stop melting down.

    If you compare the damage done in Chernobyl to civ terms, 1 pop is a max. If you go with the "average" meltdown we've seen in real life, the only realistic civ implementation would be something along the lines of "power plant is destroyed" and the city gets some :yuck: for like 20 turns, like water poisoning only worse.
     
  15. cardgame

    cardgame Obsessively Opposed to the Typical

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    14,911
    Location:
    Misery
    I think it should be rarer, 1/10 of now sounds right, but the effects should be a bit worse:

    +1 :mad: in every city with a Nuclear power plant.
    +5 :yuck: for 10 turns
    -2 pop. instantly. It may not be too realistic but it would be more balancing considering how huge some cities can get and how quick they grow back..
     

Share This Page