Environment & Energy
In reply to the discussion: Reason for and a critical question about 2012's 6.9% decline in nuclear production [View all]kristopher
(29,798 posts)Last edited Thu Dec 19, 2013, 10:21 PM - Edit history (1)
There are a few people who tirelessly criticize the reaction resulting in higher carbon consumption brought about by the failure at Fukushima. Those individuals blame the public's response on an irrationality. That is neither here nor there, the fact is the reaction is real and has to be taken into account.
That blame game hides the fact that one of the consequences of using a technology with extreme consequences related to failure is the backlash when such a failure occurs.
- The proximity of nuclear plants to population centers is a fact.
- The example of an imperiled Tokyo being spared because the wind happened to blow E instead of SSW is a fact.
- The observed failure rate for an aging global nuclear fleet is a fact.
- The public reaction to Fukushima curtailing nuclear and increasing fossil consumption is a fact.
- I agree the need for speed is urgent.
Given that set of facts, what happens to our to our investment and our plan to move away from carbon if a metropolitan area is lost because of a meltdown?