I will be back....

[me_in_japan]

im on the ps3, so ill keep it brief. the examples you give about the pressure on whistleblowers to keep silent are nodoubt true, and iapplaud those scientists for speaking the truth. however, they dont change my assertation that nuclear power is a viable option. none of the examples show nuclear power tobe dangerous, so long as rules are followed. in much the same way, while driving a car can be very dangerous, as long as we follow the rules like stopping at traffic lights, observing speed limits etc. then a car is viewed as an acceptable everyday convenience. there are many things in our lives that are dangerous if we misuse them, but that isnt justification to stop using them completely.

[Primarch]

Summary of Wind Turbine Incidents (December 2008):
• 41 Worker Fatalities, 16 Public- Includes falling from turbine towers and transporting turbines on the highway.
• 39 Incidents of Blade Failure- Failed blades have been known to travel over a quarter mile, killing any unfortunate bystanders within its path of destruction.
• 110 Incidents of Fire- When a wind turbine fire occurs, local fire departments can do little but watch due to the 30-story height of these turbine units. The falling debris are then carried across the distance and cause new fires.
• 60 Incidents of Structural Failure- As turbines become more prevalent, these breakages will become more common in public areas, thereby causing more deaths and dismemberment’s from falling debris.
• 24 incidents of "hurling ice”- Ice forms on these giant blades and is reportedly hurled at deathly speeds in all directions. Author reports that some 880 ice incidents of this nature have occurred over Germany’s 13-years of harnessing wind power.

Source: Treehugger

Seems that nothing is truly safe.

[Mike the Pike]

so long as rules are followed.

Now if only human beings could follow the eminently sensible rules we are so good at creating.
At Tokaimura, there were strict rules and protocols in place about how to prepare the materials. Three humans made conscious decisions to break the rules and unfortunately paid so very dearly.

Nuclear Power is often compared to Oil and Coal as being both safer and cleaner and we need only look to the BP incident last year and the various coal mine disasters to see that there might be some merit in that argument. However, neither oil or coal have the potential to kill millions and render huge tracts of the planet unlivable for generations to come. I think in some ways it's analogous to the popular counter argument to marijuana legalization. While Marijuana might not be that big of a deal, we already have enough problems dealing with tobacco and alcohol, do we really need to create even more.

And before anyone says that there aren't any viable alternatives, well actually there are. Solar and Wind are viable , not to mention geothermal (particularly suitable for Japan) and oft overlooked Hydroelectricity. The stumbling block to widespread usage however is, as always money. In general, Politicians and the general public just can't bring themselves to pony up the, admittedly, expensive start up fees. But sometimes ya gotta spend money to save money. The payoff won't be in one or two years, it will come 20-30-40 years down the track.

One more frothing at the mount point before I sign off... Civilian Nuclear power generation unfortunately will always go hand in hand with it's Military application. It's not as though anyone actually needs to launch one of these things either. The Russians have lost around half a dozen Nuclear powered and/or armed submarines since the end of WW2 in various locations around the world. USAF aircraft in emergency situations have also jettisoned an alarming number of nuclear weapons. Many are still unaccounted for. There's even one sitting in the sea off Okinawa somewhere. Apparently, the plane (and pilot too) that was carrying it simply fell off the side of an Aircraft carrier.

That'll do for now. Have at it MIJ

[me_in_japan]

Now if only human beings could follow the eminently sensible rules we are so good at creating.

indeed. That aint nuclear power's fault, tho. The deaths/injuries at tokaimura were down to negligence. The same thing could have happened (and no doubt has happened, and far more frequently) in any other type of power installation. Sure, the symptoms/cause of death would be different, but dead is dead, and if you work in a dangerous environment (of any kind) and dont heed the rules/warnings then getting killed is what happens.

neither oil or coal have the potential to kill millions and render huge tracts of the planet unlivable for generations to come.

true. Neither does nuclear power (at least, not in a modern power station. a nuclear bomb, yes, but thats a different thing.)

And before anyone says that there aren't any viable alternatives, well actually there are. Solar and Wind are viable , not to mention geothermal (particularly suitable for Japan) and oft overlooked Hydroelectricity.

wasnt gonna. Im all in favour of solar power (as i mentioned already). And as it happens, hydroelectric is a big thing in scotland (lots of rain = lots of waterfalls. not much in the way of solar action going on either, so we had to look elsewhere... )

Civilian Nuclear power generation unfortunately will always go hand in hand with it's Military application.

why? A nuclear bomb and a nuclear power station are two different things. A nuclear powered submarine is something else again. Im for nuclear power stations and against nuclear subs, as it happens, mostly because when push comes to shove theres a far higher chance of a nuclear sub getting shot at.

The Russians have lost around half a dozen Nuclear powered and/or armed submarines since the end of WW2 in various locations around the world. USAF aircraft in emergency situations have also jettisoned an alarming number of nuclear weapons.

Then they need to be a lot more bloomin careful then, dont they?

[Primarch]

so long as rules are followed.

Now if only human beings could follow the eminently sensible rules we are so good at creating.
At Tokaimura, there were strict rules and protocols in place about how to prepare the materials. Three humans made conscious decisions to break the rules and unfortunately paid so very dearly.

When the plants are operating normally, they are cleaner and greener than any of the fossil fuel plants. When they break however....
Setting up nuclear plants in a country reknowned for it's earthquakes was a bad move, I have to admit, but at the moment its still not clear how bad it is. Obviously everyone is hoping that TEPCo can get the place cleaned up and the radiation contained.

Nuclear Power is often compared to Oil and Coal as being both safer and cleaner and we need only look to the BP incident last year and the various coal mine disasters to see that there might be some merit in that argument. However, neither oil or coal have the potential to kill millions and render huge tracts of the planet unlivable for generations to come

Actually, continued use of Oil and Coal will render the entire planet unlivable for everyone. Coal, Oil and Nuclear Power have massive pollution concerns.

I agree that renewable sources are the best choice and as and when I buy a house, I will definitely look at getting solar panels put on it. It is however worth pointing out, that it is only in recent years when the energy it costs to make a Photovoltaic panel has dropped below the energy the PV Panel will produce in it's lifetime.

At the end of the day, the one positive that will come from all this is that the world's governments will need to take another look at energy production. Germany has already decided to close it's reactors (though strangely they have an election coming up soon). Maybe other countries will follow suit. When TEPCo announced that the 4 damaged reactors would be decommissioned, but the 2 intact ones would keep running, the Japanese Government was very quick to say NO, all 6 would be destroyed.

As for the production of nuclear weapons, the byproducts of reactors are a very expensive way to make low quality weapons grade materials. You can do it, but if you want to make nukes, you can skip the nuclear power station step entirely.

[Mike the Pike]

All good points guys but as I said, when we have tobacco and alcohol (oil and coal) do we really need the problems associated with Marijuana (nuclear) too?

In the 31 countries that currently use nuclear power, nuclear only accounts for a mere 14% of total power generation. Surely it can't be that hard to find alternatives to that small a percentage? The French might have problems though. They generate around 75% of their power from atomic energy.

Neither does nuclear power (at least, not in a modern power station. a nuclear bomb, yes, but thats a different thing.)

But it does, as we are seeing to a limited degree right now. The unforeseen and unplanned for Earthquake/Tsunami created just such potential. There still is that potential too. I don't want to be a scare monger but even the experts at the scene don't know how bad things really are as they are still unable to see what has actually happened in the reactor buildings. That said, I do believe that the situation is to some degree 'under control' but I will be keeping a close eye on NHK at least until the reactors are buried in concrete/resin/whatever.

Actually, continued use of Oil and Coal will render the entire planet unlivable for everyone. Coal, Oil and Nuclear Power have massive pollution concerns.

I don't think that I advocated the continued use of either of these sources of energy anyway in my rabid rants. Energy efficiency and alternatives can considerably decrease our reliance on all three energy sources, until humans crack the 'super source', be it fusion, plasma or warp energy, although the latter has it's drawbacks too.

At the end of the day, the one positive that will come from all this is that the world's governments will need to take another look at energy production.

Prim has the right of it. The very thin silver lining to the radioactive cloud is that it has forced governments to re-assess the viability of nuclear power ad energy in general.

@MIJ: How can you be pro-nuclear anything? Unless I am mistaken (very unlikely ), Glasgow is around 40km from HMNB Clyde home to the royal navy's Trident missile fleet. That's a lot of potential just waiting for an unforeseeable accident to happen. BTW I know that nuclear weapons aren't generally derived from Commercial nuclear power generation but we wouldn't have one without the other. Looking at the history, it's an example of which came first? The chicken or the egg. In this case, I'd rather not have either and have lamb instead.

[ashmie]

All interesting points. I think Mike and MIJ are working at cross purposes now and will have to agree to disagree before ever searching the Internet for links to back up arguments.
I am against nuclear power as I have already said for all the reasons Pikey and others bring to light. If there are no accidents it's great but when it goes wrong it goes very wrong causing cancer and death by slow agonizing pain.
I'm not confident in saying it's safe as we all know it isn't. The general concesses here in Japan ( I came back)is that the government can get that plant under control and everything is back to normal. It isn't and it won't be cleaned up for a good long while yet.
I'm going to organise some demonstrations and meetings in Japan to support the anti nuclear campaign. Anyone who wants to join please pm me or leave a message here.

Couldn't resist this one. It is the Beeb mind you so its on the fence as it is with most issues

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12960655

This one is still alarmist but seems to be giving better facts now

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/ap ... tive-water

[me_in_japan]

edit - I think its probably best to point out at this point that while the below (and the above, for that matter) really is my opinion, Im well aware that not everyone agrees with me. That doesnt mean I dont like em or am trying to be difficult. We're all adults, and should hopefully be able to both give our own and listen to others opinions without getting personal about it. I mention this because by the looks of it several folks here have opinions different to mine, and as I know these folks personally and think theyre good guys, I dont want to put anyone's nose out of joint by accident.

and with that - read on!

I'll stay away from the good/bads of nuclear power for the mo, as as Ash says, it seems to be an agree-to-disagree topic, but one thing I think is worth pointing out is that the bad press has cost Japan billions of yen already in lost tourism, and more scaremongering is only going to make it worse. Airlines are already cancelling routes to and from Japan due to lack of interest in travelling here, which means that for the likes of you and I, going home is only going to get more and more difficult and more expensive. This is not because of any real danger (in, for example, Kyoto, or even Tokyo) but simply because the press have branded the entire country of Japan a radioactive health hazard. Its an incredibly self-serving style of reporting.

Pros - sell more papers
Cons - cause huge damage to Japan's tourist industry, at a time when the country needs its income the most.

well then bit of a no brainer, eh boss? start them presses a-rollin!

Can we maybe support Japan in its time of need, rather than creating more problems for an already struggling government?

*edit* the bbc article was good. pretty factual, and raised some very good points. I pretty much agree with it. the reader comments after were pretty reasonable, too.

The Guardian article, otoh, was an excellent example of the kind of over dramatized journalism that has plagued this incident from the start. poopy.

[Primarch]

I'm not Pro or Anti Nuclear.
I am Pro air-conditioning, internet connection, lighting in my house, fridges and microwave ovens though.
I think that everyone agrees that green energy is best, however, we dont have it nationwide right now and its blinkin expensive to set up for your house as the government dont pay for it the way they do nuclear/coal etc. Maybe this will change in the coming years. I certainly hope so.

I would like to point out to those who may decide to go and demonstrate against 'big energy,' that large areas of Japan are currently without power of any kind right now and rather than being insensitive to their problems and telling people you dont like the kind of power that is currently heating your room and keeping your food fresh, your effort might be better spent trying to find a way to help the people who need it right now. By all means, protest away when everyone is in a position where you dont appear ungrateful that you still have lights and a working TV in your house. I think that changing the country's power generation method is a GOOD idea, but now is really not the best time.

One last point I would like to make on this whole issue of "Who do we trust?"
Oversight for nuclear power generation - National Government, IEAE, World Health Organisation
Oversight for eco-groups like Greenpeace - er....drawing a blank here.
Who gets an increase in money by saying that everything is safe and well?
Who gets an increase in money by making large, sweeping statements that terrify the populace and has no-one to judge if their claims have any merit or proof?

EVERYONE is bias. Trust no-one.

[ashmie]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/ap ... egal-limit

Sure thing. The Fukushima plant contributed to just 3 percent of Japans electric. Is it really worth all the dangers to health? No.

I think we are beyond the scaremongering now and it's ludicrous to suggest the world is lieing and only Japan is telling the truth. This is a major situation that could effect all countries not only Japan. What is weird is how calm Japan has stayed and how people are going about their business as if nothing is up. It feels like invasion of the body snatchers.
Japan are trying not to panic people as you said because it has business interests at heart and needs to protect the economy.
If I continue not to feel safe here I will think about moving on. They reckon it will take a couple of years to stop the leaking. I can only apologise for my concerns but I cannot take this situation lightly or disregard it as made up hype. Behind all hype there is an element of truth. The fact that Japan haven't released weather reports of the dispersal of radiation on the wind is very worrying.

Unease about reliability and transparency were fueled by reports that the Meteorological Agency has withheld forecasts on the dispersal of radioactive substances. Although the government body provided information on wind patterns and discharges to the International Atomic Energy Agency, the Japanese public was kept in the dark. The meteorologists said they did not want to create a panic with simulations and forecasts that had a low level of accuracy. After criticism in the domestic media, the agency has pledged to release future forecasts. Taken from the Guardian above.

I am a subscriber to the Guardian and I do trust Greenpeace as I believe they have done a lot of good in trying to bring about changes in the world on issues that matter. The 60s generation thought they could change the world but they didn't but Greenpeace came pretty close so good on for trying.

Japan is already thinking to drop it's nuclear development for the future and many people have been protesting in Tokyo.

Yes I am against nuclear power.

I wont post on this again as I too don't want to be on bad terms with people for having a difference of opinion. In hindsight though I think this topic has been a good one and a lot better than bickering with each other about a load of plastic injection mold. Peace brothers.

Finally who do I trust. Not many but if I had to say anyone who has been in power at some time this man comes out on top.

Tony Benn on nuclear power: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0EO7AquyiuA

Yes he smokes a pipe which also is very bad for health but I feel he is honest on what he has learnt in his time.