Nuclear as Usual: Why Fukushima Will Change Less Than You Think

[Pryderi]

Dreary and depressing IMHO :(
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/03/nuclear-as-usual-why-fukushima-will-change-less-than-you-think/72913/

"Despite the sturm-und-drang and political posturing about the Fukushima nuclear disaster, the event won't do much to change the basic political economy of atomic energy "
<snip>

"Even in the worst case, involving the full meltdown of multiple reactors and a significant breach of containment, there are no credible scenarios wherein the Fukushima accident could conceivably have racked up a similar human, economic, or environmental toll. Nonetheless, Fukushima was the worst nuclear accident since Chernobyl and anti-nuclear activists were quick to make the comparison. Never mind that the Chernobyl disaster resulted from an explosive fire at an uncontained reactor of a far more dangerous design that exposed vastly more people to vastly more radiation than Fukushima could ever possibly result in."

<snip>

"In the end, what it all looks like is business as usual, for nukes specifically and the global energy economy more generally. Despite the claims of proponents, present day renewables remain too expensive and undependable for any economy in the world to rely upon at significant scale. So Germany, despite its vaunted solar feed in tariffs, will rely more heavily upon coal, which it has in abundance, as it retires its aging nuclear fleet. The US, already in the midst of a natural gas boom, will use more gas. And China and India, desperate for every kilowatt of power they can produce, will develop every available energy resource they have as fast as they can, including nuclear."

[villager]

1. Break out the (fully expected) apologetics! Corporate media in damage control!

n/t

[FBaggins]

2. Even in a worst case nobody would die? That's just nuts!

Three reactors melt down to some degree with limited cooling capability. The worst case definitely involves some casualties.

The best case might not result in any deaths from radiation, but there will at least be an apparent increase in cancer rates in years to come. Some lives will almost certainly be shorter than they would otherwise be.

They may be gettig awfully close to a "best case", but by no means does that mean that there would have been no human toll in a worst case scenario. A full containment breach would have caused many deaths. It still wouldn't be a dangerous health situation here in the U.S., and it wouldn't compare to the overall toll from the earthquake/tsunami, but it would have been HUGE nevertheless.

I'm pro nuclear... this guy is nuts.

[leveymg]

3. Be discouraged. Be cyncial. Be an Atlantic reader.

What a piece of sh-t asswipe that once vibrant, wonderful magazine has become under its current neocon management. Assholes.

[Octafish]

5. Was thinking along those lines.

"We are what we think. All that we are arises with our thoughts. With our thoughts, we make the world." -- Prince Gautama Siddharta

Shame, really. These turds have zero idea of what the future holds for Honshu and its good people. With plutonium, anything can happen -- to anywhere on this planet.

[quabbin]

4. Nuclear power supporters

They just can't let go of the nuclear genie. This event shows once again how dangerous the technology can be. They are in serious denial now. The world is going to move away from the technology after this latest demonstration of it's fallibility. They should all go back and read Admiral Hyman G. Rickover's testimony about nuclear power during a congressional hearing decades ago. The "Father of The Nuclear Navy" advised against developing nuclear power for commercial electricity generation. The old man could be pretty sarcastic at times. He said he was against any nuclear power that created RADIATION