3 ms·
Lying with numbers? We should rely on the Japanese government instead of random HN:ers defending their pet technology. > The cost of dealing with the aftermath
by Gwypaas 4y ago
Lying with numbers? We should rely on the Japanese government instead of random HN:ers defending their pet technology.
> The cost of dealing with the aftermath of the disaster at the Fukushima No. 1 Nuclear Power Plant will reach 21.5 trillion yen, roughly double the government's initial prediction of 11 trillion yen, preliminary calculations released on Dec. 8 by the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry have shown.
https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20161209/p2a/00m/0na/009000c https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20161209/p2a/00m/0na/00...
> While the costs are still huge, note: this is for a plant that was both hit by an earthquake and flooded by unprecedented tsunami.
Read again what I said. The cause was special, while
the risk was systemic. All western countries require independent core cooling today because there have been too many near-misses with causes related to power failures.
> Also note: even with all that in mind only one person died as the result of direct radiation exposure, and radiation levels in Fukushima region are normal or below average levels.
Who said anything about radiation? We are talking about cost. The alternative is renewables, which are vastly safer and more economical than nuclear.
Again, typical blame shifting. You are not doing nuclear power any service with coal based whataboutism.
- illiarian 4y ago> of random HN:ers defending their pet technology. Ah yes. You are not a random HNer spreading FUD. > Who said anything about radiation? We are talking about cost. The alternative is renewables, which are vastly safer If you're talking about safer, then we need to talk about safety. And nuclear power is one of the safest we have. > Again, typical blame shifting. You are not doing nuclear power any service with coal based whataboutism. What?
- epups 4y agoSo you provide a source that is 2x larger than the estimate from the other guy but over 10x smaller than yours, and you accuse him of lying with numbers? The fact that they spent a lot of money to clean the area just proves they thought this level of investment was needed, not that it actually was. If in fact they overspent, as I believe they did, this is consistent with the idea from the article, that there is overspending on misguided levels of safety when it comes to nuclear.