posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 09:55 PM
reply to post by grantbeed
Because there's already enough nuclear alarmism on ATS for ten forums. It's ridiculous. Nuclear is the cleanest viable power source available. Do
you know how many serious nuclear accidents have taken place in the US? Two. Three Mile Island, and the incidents surrounding the Demon Core. Neither
of which had any effect outside a very localized area. You point to Fukushima? Well, whose idea was it to build a nuclear plant on an active fault
line? Not the power industry. By all logic, Japan shouldn't be using standard-design reactors. Replace the boiling water facilities at Fukushima with
a thorium-based reactor, and there wouldn't be a problem. Now, on to Russia. Two come to mind. Chernobyl and Mayak. Both are classic examples of
Soviet carelessness. Both can be attributed directly to the people operating the facilities, not the design itself.
Did you know France gets 75% of its electricity from nuclear generators? They've never had a single containment failure, despite what activists try
to say. Nuclear power is dangerous, I'll agree to that. Fine. But far, far less dangerous than fearmongers would have you believe. The yearly average
for deaths relating to nuclear energy is 0. However, conventional sources such as coal, oil and related fossil fuels average over 5,000 dead per year
from extraction activities. That's not counting the deaths caused by pollution. But, you say, plutonium is radioactive! That it is. But radiation can
be negated much easier than carbon emissions. Distance and shielding. I see an easy solution here. Most oil wells are kilometers deep, and far removed
from any hazard to containment. Disposing of nuclear waste is as simple as encasing it in hardened steel and dropping it back into the earth.