Posted on 04/04/2011 7:56:47 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Pollution from coal-fired power plants is responsible for more than 100,000 deaths per year, whereas the crisis at the Fukushima nuclear plant is unlikely to kill a single person.
People are getting nervous about nuclear power in the wake of the problems at the Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan, questioning whether nuclear power is a sensible option for energy production in light of the perceived risks.
It has been three weeks since the earthquake and tsunami in Japan. There have been problems at the Fukushima plant with cooling, gas explosions (not nuclear), and radiation leaks all serious issues, but so far no one has died. The earthquake and tsunami have killed more than 10,000 people.
In fact, the disaster shows how safe nuclear reactors actually are. Reactors designed half a century ago survived an earthquake many times stronger than they were designed to withstand, immediately going into shut-down (bringing driven nuclear reactions to a halt). But the radioactive products in the reactor keep decaying, producing heat, so they must be cooled.
The real problems began when the tsunami took out all the back-up generators that were meant to provide power to circulate the coolant. Loss of site power is the worst-case scenario for a nuclear power plant, so for Fukushima this was the worst crisis imaginable. New reactors have improved safety features, including passive systems that allow cooling to take place without power.
Radiation leaks are undoubtedly serious. But it is worth remembering that we are subjected to background radiation every day as a result of natural processes some people more than others. Those living in UK areas with a lot of granite rocks, such as Cornwall, will have higher exposure than those who live somewhere like the Thames Valley.
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
About the author:
Dr Melanie Windridge is a freelance science communicator and academic visitor in nuclear fusion research at Imperial College London
“...the crisis at the Fukushima is unlikely to kill a single person.”
Haven’t five already died of radiation exposure?
Meanwhile,
http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/04_32.html
Radiation measurements have exceeded levels at which people are advised to stay indoors in a town outside the 30-kilometer radius of the damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant
...
A nuclear expert has pointed out that the government should explain the details of the finding to the residents.
Never fear..GE will save the day
http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/04_24.html
Obama said so.....well... not really.
Yea, whoever wrote this is ignorant or is lying, both bring their credibility to 0 for me.
MEANWHILE :
Fukushima Radiation: Modeling Shows Limited Spread in Ocean
http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2011/04/fukushima-radiation-modeling-shows.html?ref=hp
TEPCO said they will likely never be able to go into Reactor 3 again.
If it is so safe, that author should fly down there and go in for them.
From the Wall Street Journal :
Despite Worries, Experts Suggest Damage to Marine Life Is Contained
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704587004576242950653122000.html
yitbos
Help Support Japan’s economy and clean that ketchup off the floor
http://www.bonappetit.com/blogsandforums/blogs/badaily/2011/03/spilled-mayo-on-the-floor-ther.html
RE: Havent five already died of radiation exposure?
From what I have read, the 5 are dead from explosions, not radiation.
At Chernobyl, the first people that died from radiation died after 14 days. These people practically stood directly over the exposed reactor.
The people in Fukushoma have not died from radiation. Even if they have already gotten a lethal dose, it takes weeks to kill.
It’s a slow death if it were true.
I posted on another article that I live very close to such a plant. Everybody needs to take a deep breath. I have made no plans to move.
I certainly would rather live next to a nuke plant than a coal plant or field of wind turbines.
Things happen; I'm not rattled in the least. Learn from it and apply it. That's really what should be done.
Things happen; I'm not rattled in the least. Learn from it and apply it. That's really what should be done.
It’s so safe, I am sure everyone here would not have a problem living their daily lives inside of the danger zone. /s
Ask the author too do it. I am sure he would decline. If not he s a damned fool.
The future of nuclear is cold fusion.
How I Made Money from Cold Fusion
Saturday, January 23, 2010 12:28:49 PM · by Kevmo · 28 replies · 1,013+ views
Exclusive Article for Free Republic | 1/23/10 | Kevmo
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2435697/posts
HOW TO SAVE OUR ECONOMY
Friday, December 31, 2010 1:57:41 AM · by Kevmo · 40 replies The American Reporter ^ | December 29, 2010 | Joe Shea
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2649712/posts
Re-Analysis of the Marinov Light-Speed Anisotropy Experiment
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2270920/posts
Friday, June 12, 2009 11:25:41 PM · by Kevmo · 27 replies · 1,027+ views
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/physics/pdf/0612/0612201v2.pdf ^ | Reginald T. Cahill
The Suppression of Inconvenient Facts in Physics
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2266921/posts
Sunday, June 07, 2009 7:50:26 PM · by Kevmo · 78 replies · 1,626+ views Suppressed Science.Net ^ | 12/06/08 | http://www.suppressedscience.net/
The End of Snide Remarks Against Cold Fusion
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2265914/posts
Friday, June 05, 2009 5:56:08 PM · by Kevmo · 95 replies · 1,770+ views
Free Republic, Gravitronics.net and Intrade ^ | 6/5/09 | kevmo, et al
Cold Fusion Rebirth? New Evidence For Existence Of Controversial Energy Source
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2212864/posts
Monday, March 23, 2009 12:42:14 PM · by FlameThrower · 35 replies · 1,586+ views
Science Daily ^ | Mar. 23, 2009 | American Chemical Society
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.