Massive Earthquake Hits North East Tokyo

When you take away all the subsidies and take into account the issues with waste disposal, it's a really expensive and dangerous way to boil water.   But let's all keep our fingers crossed they can avert disaster.  I can imagine they are working frantically to do so.  They have had to release some radioactive steam.

I'd hate to see one of the worst earthquakes to hit the island compounded by a nuclear disaster.


Edited by Slartibartfast - March 12 2011 at 07:06

SHUT DOWN ALL NUCLEAR PLANTS AROUND THE WORLD (as soon as possible)

I’m unable to find any trustworthy information about the nuclear power plant. This short analysis didn’t make me feel much better:

Analysis

The term "meltdown" raises associations with two nuclear accidents in living memory: Three Mile Island in the US in 1979, and Chernobyl in Ukraine in 1986.

In both, excess heat in the reactor caused fuel to melt - and in the first, wider melting of the core. The question is whether the same thing has happened in Fukushima.

It appears that the reactor was shut down well before any melting occurred, which should reduce considerably the risk of radioactive materials entering the environment.

However, the detection of caesium isotopes outside the power station buildings could imply that the core has been exposed to the air.

Although Japan has a long and largely successful nuclear power programme, officials have been less than honest about some incidents in the past, meaning that official reassurances are unlikely to convince everyone this time round.

All we can do is hope that they will avoid a disaster. My thoughts are with the Japanese people right now.

Well, the risks including possible earthquakes were known and taken into consideration in whether to pursue this technology or not. It was considered acceptable. A gamble, if you will.

Just because the wrong number just came up, it won't change anything because the acceptable risk criteria haven't changed (yet), and we can all only hope that they will, for all our sakes.

Personally, I don't think this tragedy will change anything though. The Chernobyl shock sort of petered out after a while, and so will this. The world is a place run by people who put economic before humanitarian principles, and always will. There will be the usual sympathy noises around the world and then we'll go back to business as usual.

It's sickerning!

Latest news coming out of Special TV report (from Aus reporter in Tokyo):

npjnpj wrote: Well, the risks including possible earthquakes were known and taken into consideration in whether to pursue this technology or not. It was considered acceptable. A gamble, if you will. Just because the wrong number just came up, it won't change anything because the acceptable risk criteria haven't changed (yet), and we can all only hope that they will, for all our sakes. Personally, I don't think this tragedy will change anything though. The Chernobyl shock sort of petered out after a while, and so will this. The world is a place run by people who put economic before humanitarian principles, and always will. There will be the usual sympathy noises around the world and then we'll go back to business as usual. It's sickerning!

Very good points! This is exactly what has been on my mind. It's very sad but seems to be true. Great to read your viewpoints about this subject that's for sure.

Henry Plainview wrote: npjnpj wrote: Well, the risks including possible earthquakes were known and taken into consideration in whether to pursue this technology or not. It was considered acceptable. A gamble, if you will. Just because the wrong number just came up, it won't change anything because the acceptable risk criteria haven't changed (yet), and we can all only hope that they will, for all our sakes. Personally, I don't think this tragedy will change anything though. The Chernobyl shock sort of petered out after a while, and so will this. The world is a place run by people who put economic before humanitarian principles, and always will. There will be the usual sympathy noises around the world and then we'll go back to business as usual. It's sickerning! Nuclear power is the safest, cheapest, most efficient form of power currently available. I consider myself more or less an "environmentalist", but the environmentalist opposition to nuclear power is incredibly frustrating. Unfortunately, I'm afraid that the irrational fear of nuclear power expressed in this thread and in the greater population is never going to go away, even though Chernobyl and 3 Mile Island were decades ago and clearly have no relevance to modern reactors, and it's going to be too late to replace oil with another form of power before we realize how silly and NIMBY we have been. I don't see how you can say we got lucky when one of the largest earthquakes in recorded history struck Japan and there has been no containment issue. That is the result of good planning and design.

You apparently have nukular power confused with solar, wind, geothermal, and hydro power.

to rely on nuclear power currently is the most profitable alternative for the energy companies worldwide, simple as that ... the risk, costs aso are passed on to the population/society though.

What about the research for regenerative energies? They go easy on that. Nuclear power is safe? Promotion and lies are closely remoted - Chernobyl, and now just look at Japan