Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Environment & Energy
In reply to the discussion: Reason for and a critical question about 2012's 6.9% decline in nuclear production [View all]phantom power
(25,966 posts)30. OK, I think I see...
I guess I'll make comments in the original order:
- The proximity of nuclear plants to population centers is a fact.
I agree with that, for plausible values of "proximate"
- The example of an imperiled Tokyo being spared because the wind happened to blow E instead of SSW is a fact.
I reject the premise. There is no evidence that Tokyo would have been imperiled if they were downwind. The closest thing to a measured human health impact has been an increase in thyroid tumor diagnoses, which is meaningless because nobody has ever systematically sampled an entire population before.
- The observed failure rate for an aging global nuclear fleet is a fact.
I also reject this, on the grounds that (a) quoting a failure rate from a sample size of 2 is statistically unsound, and (b) reactor designs vary widely across the space of existing reactors, and so extrapolating future industry failure rates is an exercise in comparing apples to oranges.
(I do agree that we have observed two major containment failures, and I also agree that existing reactors are aging)
- The public reaction to Fukushima curtailing nuclear and increasing fossil consumption is a fact.
I also agree: that was the reaction, and that it has increased our GHG output.
- I agree the need for speed is urgent.
No argument there. That might be the one thing everybody agrees on, with the possible exception of people who consider the question irrelevant due to having missed the window for preventing catastrophe.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
47 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Reason for and a critical question about 2012's 6.9% decline in nuclear production [View all]
kristopher
Dec 2013
OP
Anyone familiar with near misses like Davis Besse knows that we've just been lucky.
kristopher
Dec 2013
#32
Right.That football sized hole in Davis Besse's reactor head is something the Japanese did.
kristopher
Dec 2013
#37
'Shoot the messenger' is THE go to strategy the nuclear industry uses against any and all critics.
kristopher
Dec 2013
#47
The consequences are clear enough. 2013 is going to be the worst year for accumulation of...
NNadir
Dec 2013
#29
Why on earth would a smart guy like you have expected "this time" to be different?
GliderGuider
Dec 2013
#45