I've had jobs involving *managing* crisis situations, albeit not at the same scale. But ask any veteran -- the worst thing you can do in a crisis is panic.
Which is the tone you are projecting.
The problem is that your 'worst case' and the real-world worst case are two different things. As Berk has so ably pointed out, as innumerable others around the web have pointed out (including those who already *have* their master's, in this very field) this is not a Chernobyl event. It cannot become one. And if it's worse than Three Mile Island (a debatable point), it is so only in scale, not in impact or type.
By focusing on erroneous facts, were you in charge, you'd be hampering rather than helping. The people on the scene are doing as well as, if not better than, anybody else possibly could. Throwing warm bodies at the problem won't help at this stage, because right now by all accounts the site is in reaction mode. You can't be proactive when you have insufficient resources, and the resource they need is not human bodies. They need reliable power more than anything else. However, so does the rest of the country. So it comes down to triage, and the simple math is that the worst scenario that these reactors can produce is less impactful than abandoning rescue efforts elsewhere.
The media probably won't acknowledge that because it doesn't make for a good story. But any veteran should see it right away.
--sofaspud
--"Listening to your kid is the audio equivalent of a Salvador Dali painting, Spud." --OpMegs
Which is the tone you are projecting.
The problem is that your 'worst case' and the real-world worst case are two different things. As Berk has so ably pointed out, as innumerable others around the web have pointed out (including those who already *have* their master's, in this very field) this is not a Chernobyl event. It cannot become one. And if it's worse than Three Mile Island (a debatable point), it is so only in scale, not in impact or type.
By focusing on erroneous facts, were you in charge, you'd be hampering rather than helping. The people on the scene are doing as well as, if not better than, anybody else possibly could. Throwing warm bodies at the problem won't help at this stage, because right now by all accounts the site is in reaction mode. You can't be proactive when you have insufficient resources, and the resource they need is not human bodies. They need reliable power more than anything else. However, so does the rest of the country. So it comes down to triage, and the simple math is that the worst scenario that these reactors can produce is less impactful than abandoning rescue efforts elsewhere.
The media probably won't acknowledge that because it doesn't make for a good story. But any veteran should see it right away.
--sofaspud
--"Listening to your kid is the audio equivalent of a Salvador Dali painting, Spud." --OpMegs