Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Argonavis
blah blah etc
what does this supposedly prove? every industry has industrial accidents - is the nuclear industry better or worse than any other? please explain....
using giant coal loaders and drag lines is not exactly risk free
chemical factories and refineries are not exactly risk free, and if you knew how volatile those LPG tankers are..well there is a town in France that no longer exists, and I stay well clear of them on the road, as if it helps.
my point is all technology has risks, including nuclear. Our society puts up with this to get the benefits, and I suspect the opposition to nuclear is based on superstition and misinformation rather than a rational assessment. There seems a lot of hysteria in this space.
|
it might be fine if it just effected the area it is in but it dont...when you have any accident with nuclear, it cant be controlled to a control area...yes we do a lot of dangerous things but dont be an ostrich because someone else uses it..fallout from weapons testing is no different to any release of radiation...it travels...i bet the alaskans where not happy with the chinese testing(or did no one tell them)...
mind you it only shows 12 days of drift...how long did it stay in the atmosphere before completely falling to earth...oh yeh, thats one weapons test...how about the 3 mile island and chernobyl..didnt just effect northern hemesphere...
or do you think it just stays put...i think people need to consider everybody...and russian thefts, well that shows what happens when a country falls into turmoil...are any of you under the false belief that this country or any other are so stable that a russia cant happen....
no point closing the gate after the horse has bolted...is there...