I’d sure hope that the latest generation of a technology would be considered safe. That’s generally how things work. And then when accidents occur, we learn and make things safer the next time.
As to them considering it completely safe, I’d love to read about that if you have sources. Cause I doubt that they thought it couldn’t fail.
Oh yes, you’d consider it safe, but you’d probably also be aware of its faults and shortcomings.
Now I think I read it years ago in a book about the incident, but even reading the Wikipedia page I think we are both right: some of those working there were not even trained specifically for nuclear reactors, cause part of the technologies were considered state secrets.
I’d sure hope that the latest generation of a technology would be considered safe. That’s generally how things work. And then when accidents occur, we learn and make things safer the next time.
As to them considering it completely safe, I’d love to read about that if you have sources. Cause I doubt that they thought it couldn’t fail.
Oh yes, you’d consider it safe, but you’d probably also be aware of its faults and shortcomings. Now I think I read it years ago in a book about the incident, but even reading the Wikipedia page I think we are both right: some of those working there were not even trained specifically for nuclear reactors, cause part of the technologies were considered state secrets.