If Japan, the most technologically advanced country on Earth can’t handle nuclear, then what hope for the Third World countries? I’d prefer to see distributed generation Solar Africa.


I really don’t understand the nuclear hate, nobody has died all that water should just be released into the sea as it has already been filtered. You do realise that you get a larger radiation dose flying to America than most people receive working in a nuclear plant. I actually think that solar has a good future albeit with problems but that is no excuse for all the scaremongering about nuclear.


What problem?


Cost is not the only issue and does that include the subsidies paid to renewable energy?


i would like to see the attractiveness of nuclear without subsidies. Imagine trying to make a profit owning fukushima without subsidy, or find an insurance company to insure your operations. That is one of the most bizarre questions Ive seen from a nuclear booster. Nuclear is simply unimaginable without major subsidy, and when one considers the long term cost of waste management boosters generally dont even go there.


How sure are you that “nobody has died”?

Are you really sure?


cleanenergyinsight.org/inter … subsidies/


Well the fact that this question even needs to be asked over two years after the largest nuclear disaster in recent history tells its own story.


The need to evacuate the area after the nuclear reactors blew up has caused more deaths than the earthquake and tsunami caused in the Fukushima region. The evacuation was necessary because of the continuing massive release of radiation into the environment. There is no way to say how high the death toll would have been if there was no evacuation, and it is also impossible to say what the future death toll from this nuclear disaster will be.


Well was the massive evacuation an overreaction? The radiation does of the vast majority of people outside the 20km evacuation zone is negligible. Inside the zone it seems the highest is 166 mSv over the course of a year. Whether in fact a dose of this quantity is actually harmful is debatable. It is also difficult to find exact number regarding how many people died as a result of the evacuation and how many died simply as a result of the earthquake and tsunami, a newspaper report is not good evidence in my opinion.


Jesus dkin, couldn’t you find sources that underplay the effects and consequences of what happened in Japan from sources other than the pr arm of the nuclear industry.


Well they have listed their sources MIT and the WHO unlike many of the claims and reports listed in this thread, if you go looking you will find plenty more but I felt those reports were accurate and covered the main points so I used them.



pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline … -meltdown/

You’ll see from this program that in the days following the tsunami radiation levels climbed far higher than the industry will acknowledge and that the evacuation was a modest reaction to the risks. The US also evacuated 70000 of their citizens during that time. Fukushima was and is an unmitigated disaster made worse by the company that owned the plant.


I’ve already posted a link to a report showing that the US assessed the radiation risks and found them not to be significant enough to warrant wide scale evacuation. This was basically a worst case scenario completely exposed core and filled cooling pond that emptied. This was pretty much as bad as it gets. Modern reactors do not burn up like Chernobyl or explode. Despite this no one has died, in fact the major issue affecting the workers in the plant never mind the people in the surrounding areas according to your linkand the linked WHO report is psychological trauma.


Yet the US evacuated their own citizens. In case you missed it Tepco were dropping water from helicopters onto evaporating pools containing fuel rods inside a building that had been blown apart. That rods were hours from catching fire which would have spread highly radioactive particles as far as the wind would carry them. I don’t get your point about the evacuation being an over reaction, as far as the Japanese govt was concerned a major radioactive fire was a liklihood in the 2 weeks after the tsunami, and the US felt that an evacuation of Tokyo was not warranted, not the evacuation that was ordered. Are you trying to argue that the Japanese govt overreacted? The fact that the evacuation is still in place would suggest that either you or they have no idea whats going on.

nytimes.com/slideshow/2013/0 … tml?_r=0#4


I’ve looked this up and I was incorrect the spent fuel pond was not actually damaged, it was an over reaction so it is incorrect to say we were hours away from a major nuclear fire in the spent fuel pond. Based on the evidence I have seen I see very little reason for the evacuation, from what i gather TEPCO knew relatively early the extent of the damage but no one belied them instead relying on people like Arnie Gunderson who despite the fact that he provides no details as to how he pays himself and has an extremely limited nuclear background is considered some form of expert. While the real experts are completely ignored.

It is an impossible call to make however, I have no idea what level of information they had at the time, what they expected etc. maybe based on their information it was prudent but maybe it was driven by fear. I am amazed they still won’t let people back and they want to decontaminate any area what has received one mSv which is a minuscule amount. I think in these situations very little rational thought is involved and reactions are emotional and panicked.


Clearly they should hire you to manage the whole thing dkin, your intuition and gut feelings are what is missing from the Fukushima equation. I think you need to watch the frontline, there is a wealth of info and video there that can clarify the time line and the information on which the Japanese government based their decisions. For example the Japanese prime minister confirms that Tepco wanted to pull all their workers and abandon the site after the hydrogen explosion in #4, and it was the fire brigade who managed to get water onto the fuel in that building preventing a major fire, at great risk much like the guys in Chernobyl. You seem to be suggesting that there was no great release of radiation and that actually the whole thing is pretty minor. Oh, and Japan has abandoned hundreds of sq miles of coastal land for psychological reasons.


Eh? A minisule amount? 1mSv is equivalent to the dose we get from Radon gas, which is still sufficient to kill 21,000 people every year in the USA.

And the contamination is far far higher than that.


Well it will become clearer in time. I really don’t have a huge amount of interest in this topic my main contribution is to counter all the false information that people seem to spread when it come to this disaster. I don’t consider a PBS report a good source of information nor armies gunderson nor dodgy YouTube videos.the reality is that the whole thing has turned out to be pretty minor most of those people should be back in their homes, the radiation leakage does not pose a threat even to the workers in the plant never mind the surrounding people as per the several hundred page long and detailed WHO report.

In the US average background radiation is over 6 mSv per year, 1mSv is completely irrelevant. People do know how dangerous the nuclear radiation is they have been running tests for years look up linear no threshold hypothesis un scientific debunked etc you will find many links to scientific work showing that small radiation doses are not harmful but can in fact be beneficial.


But you feel like the pr musings of the nuclear industry, as clear and unreliable a VI as it is possible to imagine, are a credible counter to any other stuff on here. The PBS show, in its defense, has an interview with the plant director, the Japanese pm and various engineers who worked through the crisis. Those would be eyewitnesses to the manner in which decisions were made and information relayed and received. it also provides a timeline with which one can judge how and when the evacuation decisions were made. But I feel like you’re dissembling when you defend your criticism of the evacuation by reference to the differing readings recorded in different areas of the zone. That is an absolute non point. Nuclear boosters such as yourself reject the precautionary principle out of hand and prefer to wait until evidence can be marshalled about the past to make decisions about the present so they will never be made. the fact that there was no fuel rod fire is then evidence that there never would have been one and fears of one at the time were just the over reaction of hysterics. The PBS show proves the fallacy of that argument. Your rejection of the fire risk is just a con. You point to an article that says the US thought the pool was dry, that all the water cooling the rods had already boiled off when it had not. So what? You might as well have pointed to a comment on here that said the pool was dry. Its totally irrelevant whether people beyond the plant had their facts straight. The pool was boiling and no new water was getting to the it as the power running the pumps was out. The steam coming off the pool can be seen in video and has been widely described for what it was. The water would continue to boil until it was all gone which would have led to a fire. Thus the helicopters dropping water onto it until the fire brigade got a hose onto it. That is how perilous it was, saved by a fire engine getting close enough to spray water onto it.

Time will tell is not really any use for those trying to deal with a disaster like this one.