[notahacker]

This looks like a pretty big real world consequence to me: https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=chernobyl&safe=off&espv=21...

Say what you like about the strength of the evidence linking burning of hydrocarbons and climate change, but it doesn't carry the risk of a meltdown leaving a footprint so big and dangerous that cities have to be abandoned. I don't think it's "ignorance... that borders religiousness" that keeps the field of nuclear research heavily constrained and very expensive.

[zxcdw]

What relevance does Chernobyl have with modern nuclear power plants?

A honest question, because I am under an impression that with modern regulations and reactor designs the chance of a meltdown or less severe nuclear disaster are infitesimally small, granted that 1) regulations are being followed(which they weren't in Chernobyl) 2) safety of operation is being maintained and that the plant itself isn't faulty(which again wasn't case with Chernobyl).

[coldtea]

>What relevance does Chernobyl have with modern nuclear power plants?

The relevance that Chernobyl was too promoted as safe, like "modern power plants" are.

Plus the relevance that power plant contractors and governments STILL bullshit people all the way to the bank, with friendly experts paid to downplay the dangers.

Just watch the misinformation and lies told by the Japanese officials on the Fukushima distaster in order to cover up their failings.

I trust in science as much as everyone else.

Building a nuclear reactor is not science alone.

It's business (e.g contractors cutting corners whenever they can make money), it's politics, it's marketing, it's trust on certain things not happening (e.g a huge earthquake or a tsunami as in Japan's case, or maybe an attack), it's faith in the human operators and the software used, and tons of other factors.

I'd rather not put faith in all those coinciding happily when the outcome can be potentially lethal.

[downer91]

  e.g a huge earthquake or a tsunami as 
  in Japan's case, or maybe an attack
  ...
  faith in the human operators

To enumerate some regretably normal human factors:

1. deliberate procedural over-complication in the name of job security (political hazard)

2. disgruntled operator sabotage (political, but maybe that qualifies as an attack?)

3. operator error

4. operator laziness

5. operator incompetance

6. operator experimentation (experimentation was the cause of Chernobyl, after all)

[sliverstorm]

What relevance does Chernobyl have with modern nuclear power plants?

In line with this notion, I am reminded of automobiles. Automobiles of yesteryear were more dangerous and significantly more polluting (causing serious health problems for the residents of Los Angeles). But of course we clearly cannot point to a '57 Chevy with no seatbelts or catalytic converter and say, "Clearly cars are too dangerous and noxious to allow".

[snom380]

Agreed, I think many people don't realize the enormous cost of an accident like Chernobyl, and that wasn't even the worst case scenario even though it was pretty bad.