|
|
|
|
|
by rootusrootus
2572 days ago
|
|
> One thing I've found interesting in talking about
> Chernobyl is that advocates of nuclear power are often
> willing to accept the Soviet numbers as fact, since they
> confirm the idea that nuclear power is still relatively
> "safe" even in case of disaster. I figure it balances out the people who are extremely critical of nuclear power and accept that there could actually have been a 5 megaton explosion. I'm not a strong advocate of nuclear power myself, but I tend to discount the value of Chernobyl as an argument for/against nuclear power. It was a terrible design in addition to being old, had little in the way of containment, and the games the operators were playing with the plant were off-the-charts stupid. Compared even to the oldest commercial Western-design reactors, it is a horrid contraption. |
|