Seeing those pictures of the Chernobyl Nuclear Accident site makes me think of how vast the effects of the disaster to people have been. This site should be a reminder to anyone who wishes to build another nuclear plant or any source of alternative energy to be careful in the planning, construction, operation and all other details. If those involved have been more careful, the disaster could have been prevented and many lives could have been saved. I wish accidents like this would happen again.
He has a point though. People in general only realize problems if they are hit by it. Before that they don't bother.
Originally Posted by GreatEmerald
I'm pretty sure one accident is enough. Saying that is the same as saying that you wished for a second holocaust, just because there are people who weren't hit by the first one...
I'm sure you ment "I wish accidents like this would (NEVER) happen again"
Originally Posted by Wall-Street-Guru
Yeah I was going to say. Human error, it's inevitable...
Originally Posted by greggel
Let me start by saying I wished I had saved the links. I found a website stating the they were doing 'routine tests' when the reactor had a fallout. According to the website, it was customary to shut down safety warnings in place while doing these tests. For those of us in the US, nuclear energy is still the cleanest energy we produce. However, due to Chernobyl, Three Mile Isle, and now Japan, we have a bad feeling about nuclear energy.
Fission is definitely NOT clean energy.
Let me start by stating that I am partial to green technology. Although people state that nuclear isn't clean, which in many ways it isn't. Compared to other types of energy generation, can be clean IF done right. America seems to be the only country capable of spending the money in making reliable and efficient reactors.
A second note about green technology. Why would a country such as Italy, deny the benefits of nuclear energy. Italy want's no part in the generation of electricity with nuclear technology. Yet regardless of their own ideology, fail to accept that the electricity they source from France, comes directly from nuclear reactors that just happen to sit close to the border of the two countries. What do you think will happen when one of those reactors melt down? Too late to complain AFTER it has happened. Just because the reactor is not directly in their "back yard" so to speak, doesn't mean the fallout can't travel 100's of km.
Regarding Japan. I would like to know why on earth they built the reactor so close to a fault line. Not just any fault line but one of the biggest on the planet. For a country that prides itself on renewable energy, full of intelligent people, masters of electronic gadgetry, recycling etc... It almost seems hypocritical of Japanese culture to build nuclear energy sources when they are the leaders in renewable culture. Why not build tidal power generators? Thermal power? Wind (Mitsubishi) ? Solar (Sanyo)?? This frustrates me that they have so much capability, but all for what. Nothing...
i don't think you and i'm sure you are wrong.
Originally Posted by Michael
the fukushima nuclear power plants ARE Westernized power plants.
means Chernobyl is just a random thats Russian was first in failing at nuclear stuff.
in my knowledge there are only 2 save nuclear power systems one of them is the Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator and the other is the thorium-high-temperature-nuclear-reactor and the thorium one its just an theoretical safety
and an Westernized uranium/plutonium reactor IS NOT SAVE;
and they are not "clean" you need tonns of CO2 and other gases to build an reactor and you only have an thermal use of 2-5% means an nuclear power plant heats the Earth up without any CO2 effect.
and LOL what is clean about nuclear hazard ?
"can operate more efficiently than wind or solar energy farms"
LOL your argument is just FAIL in germany wind energy farms only get 4-5cent per KW/h of electric energie...
and an nuclear power plant cost 2,60€ per KW/h if you have the same criteria for the nuclear power plants as for the wind farm.
same criteria means:
"Calculating overall cost for the nation
The cost of nuclear power plans are massively payed by the German Gov because of the shut down of old power plans.
German Nuclear power plans do not have an Assurance means if something goes wrong the GOV pay for it means the power costs is not real because you pay tax for that."
same criteria also means :
"the german GOV give 203700000000€ for free from 1950 to 2010, its 4,3 ct/kWh for nuclear power plans "
"nuclear power plans cost 5,8 Cent/kWh (without Assurance and all gov paying). means its expensive carbon and Gas are cheaper"
"can ultimately be cheaper than other forms of "clean" energy, etc."
you are just wrong.