5 ms·

>I am two minds on the subject of nuclear power. But the "ain't so safe" side tends to win out because humans make mistakes. I'm of two minds about this as wel

>I am two minds on the subject of nuclear power. But the "ain't so safe" side tends to win out because humans make mistakes. I'm of two minds about this as well but I came to a different conclusion. In the case of Fukushima and Chernobyl I believe it was reduced to incompetence to save cost. I would hope that others have learned the lesson when dealing with nuclear energy because fossil fuels can be deadlier (generally more casualties) and more expensive.

mc32 14y ago
I don't know about Chernobyl at all. With regard to Fukushima, there appears to have been a very cozy relationship btwn TEPCO (Tokyo electric Co.) and the government. In addition, the oversight body was woefully understaffed. The problem with Japan is that in many cases there are obvious conflicts of interest which aren't addressed. For example, A former Manager for a TEPCO might eventually get a position in either the gov't overseeing nuclear policy or with the oversight body (JNES). In addition, gifts from Nuclear Operators to the Oversight body were not uncommon. This evolved into loosey goosey regulation.
- yk 14y ago
  This downside is in a way build into every nuclear energy administration. Nuclear engineers simply have only the options to work for (at best a few) power companies or for the regulator. Because of this few different employers you will almost always have a tight knit network between power companies and regulators.
noonespecial 14y ago
I'd like to see a reactor where greed and incompetence of the operators are actually considered failure modes and designed for.
- wtracy 14y ago
  As far as I can tell, it's not greed and incompetence during operation that's the big problem, so much as greed and incompetence during the design and construction itself. Otherwise, I like your thinking.
- nosse 14y ago
  I'd like to see an airline company where greed and incompetence of the operators are actually considered failure modes and designed for.

mc32 14y ago

I don't know about Chernobyl at all. With regard to Fukushima, there appears to have been a very cozy relationship btwn TEPCO (Tokyo electric Co.) and the government. In addition, the oversight body was woefully understaffed. The problem with Japan is that in many cases there are obvious conflicts of interest which aren't addressed. For example, A former Manager for a TEPCO might eventually get a position in either the gov't overseeing nuclear policy or with the oversight body (JNES). In addition, gifts from Nuclear Operators to the Oversight body were not uncommon. This evolved into loosey goosey regulation.

yk 14y ago
This downside is in a way build into every nuclear energy administration. Nuclear engineers simply have only the options to work for (at best a few) power companies or for the regulator. Because of this few different employers you will almost always have a tight knit network between power companies and regulators.

noonespecial 14y ago

I'd like to see a reactor where greed and incompetence of the operators are actually considered failure modes and designed for.

wtracy 14y ago
As far as I can tell, it's not greed and incompetence during operation that's the big problem, so much as greed and incompetence during the design and construction itself. Otherwise, I like your thinking.
nosse 14y ago
I'd like to see an airline company where greed and incompetence of the operators are actually considered failure modes and designed for.