5 ms·

I don't agree with the poster, but Fukushima? 3-Mile island? I don't think the democracy has anything to do with it.

by soperj 5y ago

IgorPartola 5y ago
Not having a totalitarian government is a necessary but not a sufficient condition to prevent covering up of accidents.
- arcticbull 5y ago
  Singapore is basically a totalitarian state and I'd trust them with a nuclear reactor. Depends on the situation I suppose.
  - asteroidbelt 5y ago
    No it is not. According to democracy index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index, Singapore is "flawed democracy" (not even a "hybrid regime"), same as Mexico, for example. The index might be not very objective, but it is not completely broken, so Singapore is definitely not a "totalitarian state".
  - vkou 5y ago
    To split hairs, Singapore is a one-party police state, but it's not totalitarian. A totalitarian state directs all of its population's efforts in pursuit of state goals. The USSR during WWII (Or during the civil war, or during the years in between the civil war and WWII) would strongly qualify - and between Stalin's death, and Glasnost, would semi-strongly qualify. North Korea would strongly qualify. Singapore, modern Russia, or modern-day China would not, because most activity that takes place in them is undirected market economics. They have a few directed economic areas, deemed of import to the state, but for the majority of activity taking place in them, the state is not involved significantly closer than it is in western countries.
pornel 5y ago
The fact that you can name all the major incidents is a testament of the safety of the technology (it really is — see deaths per TWh of various technologies). Fukushima was hit by an earthquake and tsunami. Most deaths attributed to the Fukushima disaster were people who froze to death because they couldn't afford heating after electricity price hike caused by Fukushima's shutdown. Keep in mind that nuclear plants have been operating since these incidents all over the world, without further problems. There are over 440 reactors are running right now. Even the Chernobyl power plant kept operating the remaining three reactors until the year 2000.
- arcticbull 5y ago
  And even they they only, to my knowledge, shut down the remaining three reactors in exchange for funding from the international community for the New Safe Containment sarcophagus. Nine other similar RBMK reactors have continued to operate (albeit with some safety retrofits) since then without incident.
- lovemenot 5y ago
  >> Most deaths attributed to the Fukushima disaster were people who froze to death because they couldn't afford heating after electricity price hike caused by Fukushima's shutdown. Do you have a source for this? How many froze, and of those which were for economic reasons? I was in Japan at the time, and the assertion doesn't look right, unless it's comparing tiny numbers: e.g. zero nuclear deaths and two frozen through economics, technically means "most deaths" were from freezing.
  - pornel 5y ago
    http://ftp.iza.org/dp12687.pdf http://ftp.iza.org/dp12687.pdf Yes, both are small numbers of people. I think it's a very illustrative effect — how few people were directly affected by the disaster, and how second-order effects affecting whole populations are magnified. Similarly how fear of flying after 9/11 caused people to take less-safe-per-mile car instead.
    - 5y ago
andromeduck 5y ago
Fukushima and three mile island killed a combined total of one person vs a hundred in the rushed, botched and completely unnecessary evacuation. Oil & Gas kill far more people every hour of every day. If we followed your logic trains and cars and airplanes would have never taken off.
- soperj 5y ago
  what logic are you following here exactly? I said straight up that I didn't agree with the original poster. Argue with a shadow if you want.
  - andromeduck 5y ago
    What is the consequence?

I don't agree with the poster, but Fukushima? 3-Mile island? I don't think the democracy has anything to do with it.

by soperj 5y ago

I don't agree with the poster, but Fukushima? 3-Mile island? I don't think the democracy has anything to do with it.

IgorPartola 5y ago

Not having a totalitarian government is a necessary but not a sufficient condition to prevent covering up of accidents.

arcticbull 5y ago
Singapore is basically a totalitarian state and I'd trust them with a nuclear reactor. Depends on the situation I suppose.
- asteroidbelt 5y ago
  No it is not. According to democracy index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index, Singapore is "flawed democracy" (not even a "hybrid regime"), same as Mexico, for example. The index might be not very objective, but it is not completely broken, so Singapore is definitely not a "totalitarian state".
- vkou 5y ago
  To split hairs, Singapore is a one-party police state, but it's not totalitarian. A totalitarian state directs all of its population's efforts in pursuit of state goals. The USSR during WWII (Or during the civil war, or during the years in between the civil war and WWII) would strongly qualify - and between Stalin's death, and Glasnost, would semi-strongly qualify. North Korea would strongly qualify. Singapore, modern Russia, or modern-day China would not, because most activity that takes place in them is undirected market economics. They have a few directed economic areas, deemed of import to the state, but for the majority of activity taking place in them, the state is not involved significantly closer than it is in western countries.

pornel 5y ago

The fact that you can name all the major incidents is a testament of the safety of the technology (it really is — see deaths per TWh of various technologies). Fukushima was hit by an earthquake and tsunami. Most deaths attributed to the Fukushima disaster were people who froze to death because they couldn't afford heating after electricity price hike caused by Fukushima's shutdown. Keep in mind that nuclear plants have been operating since these incidents all over the world, without further problems. There are over 440 reactors are running right now. Even the Chernobyl power plant kept operating the remaining three reactors until the year 2000.

arcticbull 5y ago
And even they they only, to my knowledge, shut down the remaining three reactors in exchange for funding from the international community for the New Safe Containment sarcophagus. Nine other similar RBMK reactors have continued to operate (albeit with some safety retrofits) since then without incident.
lovemenot 5y ago
>> Most deaths attributed to the Fukushima disaster were people who froze to death because they couldn't afford heating after electricity price hike caused by Fukushima's shutdown. Do you have a source for this? How many froze, and of those which were for economic reasons? I was in Japan at the time, and the assertion doesn't look right, unless it's comparing tiny numbers: e.g. zero nuclear deaths and two frozen through economics, technically means "most deaths" were from freezing.
- pornel 5y ago
  http://ftp.iza.org/dp12687.pdf http://ftp.iza.org/dp12687.pdf Yes, both are small numbers of people. I think it's a very illustrative effect — how few people were directly affected by the disaster, and how second-order effects affecting whole populations are magnified. Similarly how fear of flying after 9/11 caused people to take less-safe-per-mile car instead.
  - 5y ago

andromeduck 5y ago

Fukushima and three mile island killed a combined total of one person vs a hundred in the rushed, botched and completely unnecessary evacuation. Oil & Gas kill far more people every hour of every day. If we followed your logic trains and cars and airplanes would have never taken off.

soperj 5y ago
what logic are you following here exactly? I said straight up that I didn't agree with the original poster. Argue with a shadow if you want.
- andromeduck 5y ago
  What is the consequence?