Analysis: Nuclear power growth at risk if Japan plant leaks

[nadinbrzezinski]

(Reuters) - The growing risk of a significant radiation leak at two Japanese nuclear power plants following Friday's earthquake and tsunami threatens to hurt an industry that has enjoyed a rebirth since the Three Mile Island accident in 1979 and the Chernobyl disaster in 1986.

On Friday, nuclear power advocates and environmentalists staked out familiar ground over the incident. But a wider public debate may be ignited if a major radiation leak occurs in Japan, said Paul Patterson, an energy analyst with consultants Glenrock Associates in New York.

That debate has been largely muted since the 1980s when rock concerts were held to galvanize opposition to nuclear power after the Three Mile Island incident in Pennsylvania and the popular movie "The China Syndrome," that raised awareness of the dangers of a nuclear reactor meltdown.

"The severity of what happens is what is important," Patterson said of the impact of the Japanese incident.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/12/us-nuclear-japan-idUSTRE72B0O920110312

And this is why we have folks here pushing a certain line and telling us NOT to worry. The worst case scenario for the industry, and their supporters, is precisely what seems to be happening in Japan. They had a generational distance from even Chernobyl... and people were going... ok perhaps we can now accept this.

Yes it is great, yes it is wonderful... until it fails or we have to consider what to do with the waste.

So yes, they know that this has set back the industry... like it or not, And why we have people telling us to stop being afraid... and the rest.

Well... even if this does not go worst case... building new plants now will be ahem... hard.

I expect the... but, but nothing to see here to continue though.

[denem]

1. Doh! You don't need much 'Analysis' to see that.

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. We know that,

hell the last 24 hours have been surreal here.

[lib2DaBone]

2. But.I wonder about the new "small Package" high pressure, gravel..

nuclear cells? They don't require the large cooling towers and water that the old plants required.

Most of the nuclear palnts operating now were built back in the 60's and 70's.. well beyond their life cycle and behind new technology. Can we condem Nuclear on technology that is more than 50 years old?

I don't know.. I'm not a nuclear expert.. but I read about these new small plants and China has orderd 100 of them to be built in the next 10 years. :shrug:

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. Even if they are that much safer

you still have an issue with waste.

If there is any nuclear in the future, it will have to be FUSION, not FISSION, assuming that early research is right and there is no waste, or very little.

[bluestateguy]

3. Well that's certainly the most imporatnt issue now

Not the thousands dead, not the possibly millions exposed to radiation, no, the most important thing is public support for nuclear power.

That article could have been written by C. Montgomery Burns himself.

[nadinbrzezinski]

5. You know why i posted it right?

You have had more of a patience than I have.