4 ms·

I don't think the time is right to start declaring safety or unsafety of nuclear energy as the meltdown is reportedly underway at two reactors. I'm all for nuc

by borism 16y ago

I don't think the time is right to start declaring safety or unsafety of nuclear energy as the meltdown is reportedly underway at two reactors. I'm all for nuclear energy, but we must not fool ourselves into thinking that we can prevent everything. There are natural and human forces that can compromise integrity of nuclear facilities which will result in major releases of radioactive material and contamination of large land and sea areas. This is simply inevitable.

electromagnetic 16y ago
Japan just got struck by an 8.9 (some saying 9.1 making it one of the worlds most powerful earthquakes ever recorded) and 1/25 reactors had a problem. They only had a problem because they lost backup power, which is quite simply the easiest fix that can be applied to all power stations essentially rendering this an impossibility for happening again. I think it is time to declare the safety of nuclear when 1/25 plants only become dangerous after an 8.9 earthquake. Virtually 90% of the planet will never be hit by a similar level earthquake making a similar situation impossible outside of an earthquake zone. FYI the Japanese government is worried of a partial meltdown in some rods in the reactor. This is in no way a meltdown. Also furthermore there's serious doubts in the nuclear community over whether a reactor can even achieve explosive criticality. Again, proper design inhibits the danger of these accidents. Three Mile Island for incidence had the same meltdown event as Chernobyl, but because of a better core design the corium never breached the core. Given the Japanese precautions around nuclear technology I'd expect their core to hold up at least the same as Three Mile Island if not a lot better. Given they're only claiming a partial meltdown in a few rods, the risk of corium breaching the core vessel is extremely remote.

by borism 16y ago

electromagnetic 16y ago

Japan just got struck by an 8.9 (some saying 9.1 making it one of the worlds most powerful earthquakes ever recorded) and 1/25 reactors had a problem. They only had a problem because they lost backup power, which is quite simply the easiest fix that can be applied to all power stations essentially rendering this an impossibility for happening again. I think it is time to declare the safety of nuclear when 1/25 plants only become dangerous after an 8.9 earthquake. Virtually 90% of the planet will never be hit by a similar level earthquake making a similar situation impossible outside of an earthquake zone. FYI the Japanese government is worried of a partial meltdown in some rods in the reactor. This is in no way a meltdown. Also furthermore there's serious doubts in the nuclear community over whether a reactor can even achieve explosive criticality. Again, proper design inhibits the danger of these accidents. Three Mile Island for incidence had the same meltdown event as Chernobyl, but because of a better core design the corium never breached the core. Given the Japanese precautions around nuclear technology I'd expect their core to hold up at least the same as Three Mile Island if not a lot better. Given they're only claiming a partial meltdown in a few rods, the risk of corium breaching the core vessel is extremely remote.