Sure, the Fukashima incident was horrible. But remember that the thing was hit by both an extremely powerful earthquake (That displaced the islands of Japan themselves) and an extremely powerful tsunami. There was incompetence, sure, but for such an old power plant to not go all Chernobyl, you can see how practices have changed for the better.Yosharian said:Yes cos it's fantastically easy to detect the effects of a nuclear power plant radiation leak on surrounding populaces. Nobody actually knows how much radiation was released, and it will take years for the true damage to be detected. All of which is besides the fucking point, a catastrophe occurred because of incompetence, and nothing is happening to prevent future similar occurences.
At any rate, what are the chances that the UK (Which, might I add, is the location this topic is talking about) gets hit by a earthquake/tsunami double team? The UK isn't on or near any destructive plate boundries - it is almost impossible for the UK to be hit by a high power tsunami short of one caused by an eruption of a large volcano in Iceland which, might I add, are not the destructive boundary volcanoes found in places like St Helens or Japan. I can understand issues when building a nuclear power station on a place prone to disasters but the UK? The worst we've had are minor floods which, I certainly hope, something as dangerous as a nuclear power station will be protected from.