NationStates Jolt Archive

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/apasia_story.asp?category=1104&slug=Japan%20Nuclear%20Glance
This article describes the worst nuclear accident in Japanese history, where a radioactive accident made superheated steam leak, killing four technicians and injuring seven. Thankfully, no traceble amounts of radiation were leaked.
This, I believe will kill the already ailing nuclear power program. The last two nuclear strongholds are France and Japan, and one may suffer from a public outcry against it very soon.

Sounds like a tragedy, but it doesn't seem as those the accident was related at all to nuclear power in particular. It seems as though it could have ahppened in any facility that utilizes steam or produces it as a byproduct.

Sounds like a tragedy, but it doesn't seem as those the accident was related at all to nuclear power in particular. It seems as though it could have ahppened in any facility that utilizes steam or produces it as a byproduct.
Still, this will mobilize those in Japan with anti-nuclear sentiments to act (and they're out there en masses). Only nuclear power, it seems, can rally such emotions. Even coal, which is far more dirty and inefficient, doesn't have many attackers.

Saddly, the truth is that the current administration has actually been pushing for MORE nuclear plants as a method of assuaging foregn oil dependance with minimal impact on greenhouse gas emmissions.

However they HAVE recognized that the cost of building these plant makes it a prohibitive market to enter, so they actually have proposed removing the requirement for pesky little details.... like containment domes!

Saddly, the truth is that the current administration has actually been pushing for MORE nuclear plants as a method of assuaging foregn oil dependance with minimal impact on greenhouse gas emmissions.

However they HAVE recognized that the cost of building these plant makes it a prohibitive market to enter, so they actually have proposed removing the requirement for pesky little details.... like containment domes!
I'm all for nuclear power plants. They are quite fail safe. Chernobyl only happened because the reactor was really to create weapons grade plutonium, thus doing something normal reactors could never do. The only problem I can see is nuclear waste, but a Yucca Mountain opening every few decades should solve that.

bump

I'm all for nuclear power plants. They are quite fail safe. Chernobyl only happened because the reactor was really to create weapons grade plutonium, thus doing something normal reactors could never do. The only problem I can see is nuclear waste, but a Yucca Mountain opening every few decades should solve that.

I agree that nuclear plants CAN be built quite safely, however because of what a failure can cause it is neccessary to put in additional safeguards.

You skipped over the other instance: Three Mile Island. Had the dome not been there it would have been a VERY different story for the area residents.

I agree that nuclear plants CAN be built quite safely, however because of what a failure can cause it is neccessary to put in additional safeguards.

You skipped over the other instance: Three Mile Island. Had the dome not been there it would have been a VERY different story for the area residents.
That was a media blow-up of the story. It was a relatively minor incident, and every safeguard there worked properly. The only problem was the hydrogen bubble there, but even that had low levels of radiation. Besides, reactor designs of today have been tested in Japan and France. They are relatively safe, even for breeders.

my nuclear power story: i recently saw on tv a parking lot full of cars. These cars belonged to a group of people who were protesting a nuclear power plant that is about 100 miles away from me. i had an interesting thought. what has killed more people, the products that the people drove to the protest, or the thing that they were protesting?obviously the cars. what puts out the pollution that hurts me every day, the cars in that lot or the power plant? the cars. what is the record of nuclear power as compared to the things the people used to get to the sight of the plant in order to protest it? very good. my final thought: what has made these people so confused and irate? Irrational fear.

That was a media blow-up of the story. It was a relatively minor incident, and every safeguard there worked properly. The only problem was the hydrogen bubble there, but even that had low levels of radiation. Besides, reactor designs of today have been tested in Japan and France. They are relatively safe, even for breeders.

Well, the last safeguard that worked WAS the dome.... but you are corect that the technology has improved. I think that in Ontario we actually get about 30% of our power from nuclear plants, and the two major plants that we have really are the test sites from which the Candu reactors have been developed and shipped around the world.

I just worry about a government plan that looks to be encouraging companies to get into this business on the cheap.

I live in new york and my power comes from a nuclear power plant. so much fear mongering among the anti-nuclear power politicians in this state has put irrational and ignorant thoughts in peoples heads. People speak of terrorists using an aircraft to "blow up" the plant which is not chemicly possible. also, the thing about the cars that i said. I just cant wait for them to shut down the plant and replace it with coal burning or what not so my fuel bills can triple. hooray! not. Yes, very true though, we really should be wary of companies going overboard with the "cheap" aspect of it. that would be a disastor waiting to happen. But as it stands now, the system is damn good.

agreed

Well, the last safeguard that worked WAS the dome.... but you are corect that the technology has improved. I think that in Ontario we actually get about 30% of our power from nuclear plants, and the two major plants that we have really are the test sites from which the Candu reactors have been developed and shipped around the world.

I just worry about a government plan that looks to be encouraging companies to get into this business on the cheap.
Don't know much about the new plan for nuclear reactors in both the US and Canada, though I do know that the new reactor design is, as the designers tell us, meltdown proof. I see nuclear plants being a tremendous investment, because it costs only a little to maintain, almost nothing for the uranium, and the power is expensive enough to help pay for the plant in a couple of decades. Canada, in fact, is making a very wise choice in nuclear power. They want one in Alberta's tar sand fields in order to provide the needed steam, and this would make the oil cheaper. It sounds like a profitable idea to invest in a power plant, or a transmission line, or anything like that. After all, will North America's demand for energy ever decrease?

I'm all for Nuclear Power. Much better than Coal/Oil/Gas...

Plus the little fact that superheated steam bursting things and killing people is commonplace in powerplants and large machinery areas, not just nuclear plants.

That's all well and good, but what about the byproducts?