Quote:
Originally Posted by renormalised
Ron, please...2 extreme cases in an industry whose safety record far exceeds any other power generating industry and a lot of others as well. That's not to say it doesn't have problems, but you have to be pragmatic and realistic about what you say and not go down some emotive line when you look into something like this. If they never had the quake or tsunami, those reactors would be blithely putting out electricity and you'd have never heard hide nor hair of them. Any powerplant has accidents, nuclear included, but which power industry has had the worst accidents and the greatest number of deaths and serious health concerns over the years....I think you'll find it's conventional plants.
How much do you think a coal fired or gas fired powerplant costs to build and how long it takes to build one...it's just as long as a nuclear plant. How safe do you think they really are...and if you don't think there's any radioactivity, think again. One of the dangers of coal fired plants is the radon gas that is present in coal. But apart from that you have all the other problems associated with them, as is well known.
In any case, the problem in Japan is nothing like Chernobyl, not even close. The reactors are a different type and far more modern. Chernobyl was a disaster waiting to happen, plus a case of incompetency on the part of the operators. Japan is a case of being in the wrong place and not being strong enough to withstand a quake of this size. But then again how many structures would be.
|
Carl there have been many more Accidents
in the Nuclear Power Generating Industry
Britain in the past had quite a few so did the USA (Three Mile Island comes to mind),but A lot of the Accidents Go Under reported with small bits of reporting down the back of the paper or the news
Big Question
why build Nuclear power plants in an earth quake prone area
Big Answer Money
