5 ms·

- 20.000 died because of the Tsunami. - 2.000 died in the evacuation attempt. - ONE person died because of actual radiation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuku

- 20.000 died because of the Tsunami. - 2.000 died in the evacuation attempt. - ONE person died because of actual radiation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster_casualties https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disa...

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
ViewTrick1002 3y ago
Then we can discount all people being hurt from falls when building solar plants because the panels themselves did not kill them, they just did not follow OSHA regulations! Solar = 0.0! Why don't we abolish the Price–Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act and see how far nuclear gets when having to pay the true cost for their insurance? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price%E2%80%93Anderson_Nuclear_Industries_Indemnity_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price%E2%80%93Anderson_Nuclear...
- spi 3y ago
  Are you implying that if there was no Nuclear plant in Fukushima, the Tsunami would not have happened, or the people living there wouldn't have been needed to be evacuated?
  - hef19898 3y ago
    Tsunami? Yes. Evacuatiom due a nuclear melt down of a non-existing nuclear power plant? I don't know, but maybe not.
- stjohnswarts 3y ago
  Show me a general solar or wind solution that works just about anywhere that is guaranteed to have at least 1 week of back up power when the power takes a nose dive during extreme weather or even just when the wind/solar dips, even 1 day would be a great improvement over what we have now. I would be onboard with solar/wind all day if this was true.
demondemidi 3y ago
The solution is clear. Ban tsunamis.
natmaka 3y ago
"In 2012, ex-prime minister Naoto Kan was interviewed about the Fukushima nuclear disaster, and has said that at one point Japan faced a situation where there was a chance that people might not be able to live in the capital zone including Tokyo and would have to evacuate ((...)) If things had reached that level, not only would the public have had to face hardships but Japan's very existence would have been in peril" Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_reaction_to_Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster#Evacuations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_reaction_to_Fukushima...
- throwaway4aday 3y ago
  An absurd counterfactual. This was assuming a scenario in which Fukushima released a ridiculously high level of radiation, which it didn't, that would necessitate other nuclear power plants to be immediately evacuated with nothing done to shut down their reactors resulting in a "chain reaction" of other plants releasing radiation presumably from the engineers just running away and letting a meltdown take place. Absolute FUD and bullshit since this would be an incredibly irresponsible thing to do and the Japanese people are far too competent and conscientious to enact such a hare brained evacuation. Stop spreading disinformation please.
  - natmaka 3y ago
    At the time of the Fukushima disaster no one could assess in real-time, and therefore according to the then-prime minister the worst case scenario was worked on. You can call it 'disinformation' (in other words: 'he is a liar'!) without any source all day, those are hard facts.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

ViewTrick1002 3y ago

Then we can discount all people being hurt from falls when building solar plants because the panels themselves did not kill them, they just did not follow OSHA regulations! Solar = 0.0! Why don't we abolish the Price–Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act and see how far nuclear gets when having to pay the true cost for their insurance? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price%E2%80%93Anderson_Nuclear_Industries_Indemnity_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price%E2%80%93Anderson_Nuclear...

spi 3y ago
Are you implying that if there was no Nuclear plant in Fukushima, the Tsunami would not have happened, or the people living there wouldn't have been needed to be evacuated?
- hef19898 3y ago
  Tsunami? Yes. Evacuatiom due a nuclear melt down of a non-existing nuclear power plant? I don't know, but maybe not.
stjohnswarts 3y ago
Show me a general solar or wind solution that works just about anywhere that is guaranteed to have at least 1 week of back up power when the power takes a nose dive during extreme weather or even just when the wind/solar dips, even 1 day would be a great improvement over what we have now. I would be onboard with solar/wind all day if this was true.

demondemidi 3y ago

The solution is clear. Ban tsunamis.

natmaka 3y ago

"In 2012, ex-prime minister Naoto Kan was interviewed about the Fukushima nuclear disaster, and has said that at one point Japan faced a situation where there was a chance that people might not be able to live in the capital zone including Tokyo and would have to evacuate ((...)) If things had reached that level, not only would the public have had to face hardships but Japan's very existence would have been in peril" Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_reaction_to_Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster#Evacuations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_reaction_to_Fukushima...

throwaway4aday 3y ago
An absurd counterfactual. This was assuming a scenario in which Fukushima released a ridiculously high level of radiation, which it didn't, that would necessitate other nuclear power plants to be immediately evacuated with nothing done to shut down their reactors resulting in a "chain reaction" of other plants releasing radiation presumably from the engineers just running away and letting a meltdown take place. Absolute FUD and bullshit since this would be an incredibly irresponsible thing to do and the Japanese people are far too competent and conscientious to enact such a hare brained evacuation. Stop spreading disinformation please.
- natmaka 3y ago
  At the time of the Fukushima disaster no one could assess in real-time, and therefore according to the then-prime minister the worst case scenario was worked on. You can call it 'disinformation' (in other words: 'he is a liar'!) without any source all day, those are hard facts.