|
|
|
|
|
|
by maxerickson
2506 days ago
|
|
|
No, I said The Fukushima disaster nicely demonstrated that there is lots of risk. But people should analyze the risk as it exists, not shout about another Chernobyl. That a wealthy, stable nation failed to account for a situation with pretty strong historical evidence is not encouraging. And then there were multiple relatively inexpensive ways that Fukushima could have been better prepared. |
|
|
Well as you said, there are a lot of consequences and risks even if it's not another Chernobyl.
> And then there were multiple relatively inexpensive ways that Fukushima could have been better prepared.
And this is what it really comes down to. Can nuclear power be made safe? Yes, but typically stupidity, profits, and capitalism take precedence. Again, in the US nearly all operation nuclear power plants are operating past their designed life and have cracks larger than the allowable tolerances. Power plants are expensive to build and profitable to keep running so just like every other capitalist business/plant, you invest barely any money into fixes/repairs, you instead spend money on bending the rules to stay in business longer, and you run it into the ground, typically until failure. At the end of the day the owner of the company can declare bankruptcy, shut down the company, and go on with his life on some island away from any repercussions from the destruction caused.