How about an Immortal-based mech (i.e. from StarCraft 2)? That was last year's winner... see this vid: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrhlYsF2uTU

Going by Wiki, this is incorrect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclear_reactors#China
They've got a bunch under construction that use French tech from the 90s (CPR-1000), and then they have the AP1000 and EPR which are American and European, respectively. Finally a trio of CNP-600 which I'm not sure what they are... So definitely not Russian tech.

Thanks for piquing my curiosity, though :)

Other issues aside... Vermont doesn't have history of tsunamis + earthquakes.

The problematic welds I were referring are on the pressure vessel, NOT the containment vessel

As for the containment vessel, the air is not corrosive (any more than regular air) unless you have an accident with the pressure vessel. Even on the timescale of Fukushima, I'm pretty sure corrosion won't be a problem before we have such a facility under control.

It's an improvement over a reinforced concrete containment vessel - it can handle about 2.5 times the internal pressure safely.

Is going to steel containment from reinforced concrete (that doesn't handle pressure as well as steel) a step backwards in your opinion?

I will admit that I thought there was a larger gap between the outer building and the steel containment than this picture indicates.

We do this for uranium, too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium_mining#In-situ_leaching

I guess at least we don't cause earthquakes with this and the ground was already radioactive? =-x

I'm pretty sure there are no (commercial) graphite moderated reactors in the US. (Wandering slightly from that point: I'm also reasonably happy to leave policing other countries' nuclear policy to IAEA rather than the US...) So I'm not sure that's a great example.

I'm not clear on what the bargain basement containment is that you refer to. But I have my own understanding of the changes, which I'll share... From what I've heard/read/learned, past light water reactors in the US use used a single containment vessel: steel reinforced concrete, which is also the reactor building. Newer ones have a solid steel containment vessel AND a concrete reactor building (with less steel reinforcement maybe?.

Why this is better/adequate? Steel is much better as a secondary pressure vessel (think Fukushima hydrogen pressure -> explosion). Steel also conducts heat much better than concrete, so you get heat out of the containment without transferring mass out of containment. Then you drip water on the outside of steel containment to remove the decay heat building up inside, and this also controls the pressure, too. The concrete reactor building is your plane shield.

That said, manufacturing that giant steel vessel is an added cost that other reactors didn't have. They also made the actual pressure vessel more expensive to fabricate by getting rid of some of the weld seams. (Said seams end up being the most likely candidate of problems after 40 years of reactor operation, though such failure has not occurred in the US... Fukushima maybe? I don't think we know yet.)

(I am a nuclear engineering grad student, but keep in mind curriculum doesn't spend that much time on actual reactor containment design... so I'm not an expert, per se)

Perhaps the best metrics I've heard for 'knowing' a language is knowing how/when to properly make up words such as 'googled', e.g. turning any noun into a verb.

I'm pretty sure we spent most of 8 years calling our own (US) president a monkey in political banter.

I do in fact have a mental image of his ranting being like a crazy monkey.

I raced in the last race, actually (UMichigan).

Was just saying that Nuon's teams aren't underdogs by any definition I can think of (prior to getting 2nd in 2009). :)

What? You mean yay for your high-tech equipped team that competes with lesser-tech equipped teams?