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.
|
A scientist employed by Fukushima had warned management that the power plant was at risk to a tsunami and gave them a plan to shore it up to withstand such an event. Since that would cost a lot of money, the company fired him.
Don't blame the technology. Blame managers who take shortcuts to increase profits. The BP oil spill comes to mind.