Quote:
Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby
It's trendy for sure. But remember the Fukushima disaster in 2011 - a single earthquake and resulting tsunami could destroy the plant, AND risk a nuclear explosion, and radioactivity resulting in massive deaths and disease in anyone within a few miles of the fallout. That basically puts the entire west coast out of the running for placement.
As for the east coast, whose back yard do you want to bury the waste in? Because - where there is nuclear energy, there is nuclear waste. And it has to be put somewhere.
Maybe somewhere in the Sahara desert - but that'd be pointless, since a power plant has to be in a reasonable distance to the homes and businesses it's powering.
So these are the reasons why it's not a popular option. I personally think nuclear energy could be amazing. But those particular risk make it a NIMBY option for me.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuccillo
No, it doesn't work that way. Nuclear power plants cannot go supercritical and explode. They can melt down and cause a host of problems but a nuclear explosion is simply not possible. Hydrogen gas can accumulate in the enclosure and explode but that is not the same as a nuclear explosion. The fuel is not enriched enough for a supercritical nuclear reaction. Please stop making false and ridiculous statements.
|
So the part about an explosion - I'm wrong. Not a nuclear explosion. Okay fine. A different type of explosion. And still radiation that can kill tens of thousands of people, animals, and lay the land near it fallow and/or uninhabitable. Nothing "ridiculous" about it. I was not "false" I was incorrect about the type of explosion that could result. I was not incorrect about the fact that there could be an explosion. OR that radiation from damage to a nuclear power plant can cause radiation to kill people, animals, and be destructive to the land around it.
As for future power plants being safer - they said that about Chernobyl, before there was a meltdown and over 4000 people died. Now we have much more stringent regulations, which means the price to build another one has risen to the point of not being affordable, without significantly raising taxes to pay for it. Meanwhile, nuclear power has mostly fallen out of favor worldwide, replaced by solar, wind, and hydroelectricity. Except in the US, where so many people would rather burn their clothing for fuel than accept the fact that renewable energy is better for everyone, and for the planet, and for the air. Or maybe they know this and just don't care.