Replies

For example, even if there is a permanent exclusion zone around fukishima, it will be smaller than the land permanently lost to a hydroelectric plant; it might be less than the land lost to a solar or wind farm as well, depending on how big the exclusion zone is.

Yours is one of the best posts I read about the issue of Nuclear Plant Safety. The more new plants that are put into operation, the safer the situation will be. And from my understanding people could really move back into the area around Chernobyl but there is no reason to move back as there was never a lot there to begin with. But the radiation level is not such that people could not move back. I cannot confirm this and I don't know enough about the situation to say for certain. But one thing is for certain, people are living perfectly normal and healthy lives in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

No form of energy is without risks. We don't live in a risk free society. But the radicals want to destroy Industrial Society. They really do. These anti-nuclear power are very dangerous types. They have absolutely no answer as to how we are going to have the energy we need for the future. Only a complete idiot would believe wind and solar together can ever be more that just a very small amount of what we need. I always ask the people I know what wind power does for you when there's no wind. I ask what do you do when there is no sun shinning. I never get an answer from these buffoons. These people scare me to death.

Chernobyl had a theme part that was within a couple of days of opening.

My daughter is begging me to take a summer trip to Chernobyl. She’s looking at tours and everything. I dont’ know why, but she considers it a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. I hope she can find something else to see while she is in the Ukraine, because it’s expensive enough to get there.