4 ms·
From wikipedia: "but 34 people died as a result of the evacuation" [1]. I'm not sure I can agree that Fukushima isn't an internationally noteworthy incident.
by new299 9y ago
From wikipedia:
"but 34 people died as a result of the evacuation" [1].
I'm not sure I can agree that Fukushima isn't an internationally noteworthy incident. It's even one that really requires long term monitoring of radiation levels (locally only of course).
Many mistakes were made in the handling of the Fukushima reactor and accident. Radiation accidents have the potential of be massive disasters. It's important to learn from Fukushima, and not just treat it as an "acceptable cost".
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster_casualties https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disa...
- tptacek 9y agoI don't think they said it wasn't noteworthy.
- acjohnson55 9y agoDidn't they thought? I'm trying to communicate that I don't think that Fukushima was a disaster that warranted international coverage - the weather was. I guess you could draw a distinction between the terminology each post used, but it reads the same to me.