Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by xlpz 5575 days ago
I quote from The Article(tm):

"What is the worst-case scenario for Fukushima Daiichi? It's difficult to be definitive, because information is limited and often confused, and the outcome will depend on the decisions the plant's operators take."

They don't discard anything, and just because something is less serious than Chernobyl it does not make it "minor". Also, so-called experts have been consistently wrong in estimating things in the past days.

Seriously guys, just wait and see for a few days before shouting from the rooftops how amazingly reinforced nuclear power has come out of this. You are not helping anyone.

It honestly just seems that you already know that nuclear energy is a must-have, so you are reasoning backwards from there. If the accident was very serious it would call into question your ideas, so it must be minor, even if it's not over yet and some serious shit still could happen in the future. I just can't support this way of reasoning.

1 comments

just because something is less serious than Chernobyl it does not make it "minor"

But that's creating a seriously false dichotomy: Nobody is saying that this situation is "minor", and I most definitely don't think it is, and did not post this to downplay the situation.

I posted it because Chernobyl comparisons are like the Godwins Law of nuclear power. Things can be very bad without being comparable to Chernobyl.

"Nobody is saying that this situation is "minor""

Yes they are.

Earlier in this very thread, alextingle wrote:

"This relatively minor accident has come at a very unfortunate time."

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2337966

And that's far from the only time this sentiment has been expressed on HN.

Lots of pro-nuclear advocates on HN have repeatedly said that the Fukushima accident is minor. This was especially true a few days ago, but even now some are continuing to maintain it's no big deal.

The 2011 Japanese tsunami has killed at least 7000 people. The Chernobyl accident killed up to 4000 people. Problems at the Fukushima power plant are far less severe than Chernobyl (see the article) so they are relatively minor.

Or do you feel that a life taken by cancer is worth more than a life taken by drowning??