4 ms·

Actually, no they didn't. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_Nuclear_Power_Plant#Operating_history http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_N

by Caerus 15y ago

Actually, no they didn't. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_Nuclear_Power_Plant#Operating_history http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_Nuclear_Power... Yes, all systems fail. Fukushima was hit by a magnitude 9.0 earthquake and a 10m tsunami, which is about the worst environment imaginable and it almost survived intact. Most newer technologies would have been unaffected, or at least shut down into a safe state. And yes, you can come up with nightmare scenarios for every technology. Fukushima experienced one in a dilapidated state and just about came through unscathed. Add in another 30 or 40 years of science and engineering and the chances of a nuclear disaster effectively become zero. Compared with the pollution and deaths associated with coal, I know which side I'd rather be on.

Tichy 15y ago
Showing one single plant without failures doesn't prove anything, sorry. And the comparison with coal is completely besides the point. Edit: OK, only now read the Wikipedia link. So your point is that Fukushima was not operated properly? Well that is exactly my point. Even if in theory you could design a secure system, it won't work out in reality. "The system" is not only one reactor, it is the whole system of society that operates it. Just look at the way the US handles airport security after 9/11 and after the shoe bomber and underwear bomber (naked body scanners). The same way they will handle nuclear power plant security. If there is a problem, they will fix that particular problem and totally miss the big picture. (And every country also, just mentioning the US because their airport failure is so well known these days). And another Edit: if they knew Fukushima was not safe before the accident, why did they not shut it down? Think about it, and then extrapolate to other nuclear plants. And how did they sell Fukushima to the public when it was built? I am sure they claimed it was safe at least back then.

by Caerus 15y ago

Tichy 15y ago

Showing one single plant without failures doesn't prove anything, sorry. And the comparison with coal is completely besides the point. Edit: OK, only now read the Wikipedia link. So your point is that Fukushima was not operated properly? Well that is exactly my point. Even if in theory you could design a secure system, it won't work out in reality. "The system" is not only one reactor, it is the whole system of society that operates it. Just look at the way the US handles airport security after 9/11 and after the shoe bomber and underwear bomber (naked body scanners). The same way they will handle nuclear power plant security. If there is a problem, they will fix that particular problem and totally miss the big picture. (And every country also, just mentioning the US because their airport failure is so well known these days). And another Edit: if they knew Fukushima was not safe before the accident, why did they not shut it down? Think about it, and then extrapolate to other nuclear plants. And how did they sell Fukushima to the public when it was built? I am sure they claimed it was safe at least back then.