why do people suddenly fear nuclear power plants?

[Ekit]

Well, if I was in war with another country and that country had a nuclear power plant, then I know what I'd bomb first.

 

[Nova Helix]

People scare easily over nothing.

Nuclear power is the safest, cleanest, and most efficient energy source. (wind is not viable in most areas)

 

[gl1koz3]

Those power plants are not of the same design as Chernobyl... Catastrophic coolant failure is much less of a possibility. Also, imagine what crazy shit can happen when any non-alternative energy plant blows up. Yeah, much worse. So they should just piss off.

 

[banksy122]

For me I hate them because of the toxic waste they produce...

also I have played WAY to much sim city!

You would be happy to know that 95% of the waste is reused for even more power, and the 5% of waste that is left is do degraded the half-life of it is like 150 years.

 

[RyQ_TMC]

Why do they? Because that's the current "threat spotlight". Something happened, the media blew it out of proportion (there are more articles about the reactor than about how people fare after the earthquake), and now it's the big scare. It will remain such until the next big thing rolls around. Plus, with nuclear power, there's always Chernobyl that you can wave in people's faces. You know, that plant which had very bad safety measures and which was chosen as the site for a poorly-planned experiment?

I don't mind nuclear power. It's cleaner than fossil fuels. If you come up with efficient solar or wind plants, I'd be happier (since you still have radioactive waste), but for now, the atom is probably the best we've got.

 

[wulfy42]

This is why:

SOMA, Japan (AP) ? The second hydrogen explosion in three days rocked Japan's stricken Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant Monday, sending a massive column of smoke into the air and wounding 11 workers. Hours later, the U.S. said it had shifted its offshore forces away from the plant after detecting low-level radioactive contamination.
The aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan was about 100 miles (160 kilometers) offshore when it detected the radiation, which U.S. officials said was about the same as one month's normal exposure to natural background radiation.
It was not clear if the radiation had leaked during the Monday explosion. That blast was felt 25 miles (40 kilometers) away, but the plant's operator said radiation levels at the reactor were still within legal limits.

 

[The Hairminator]

I think some worrying is in place after years of telling us "No, it's virtually impossible for something to go wrong with modern nuclear plants". Well... at least 2 reactors literally just exploded in Japan- and as far as I know their stuff was top-notch.

 

[AngloDoom]

They are more then "slightly" dangerous especially in areas where there are many plants close together. Nowhere in the world has more nuclear plant density then Japan...and if things go bad it could end up being a world wide problem.

Thing is the rods need to stay cooled for something like 40 years after they are used. IF they do not they can meltdown which not only releases alot of heat but also a ton of radiation. Chernobyl (sp) was a good example of what could happen....but there are a ton of nuclear plants in japan (around 60 right now I think)and it just takes one plant melting down to put all the others in danger through a chain reaction that could not only leave all of japan uninhabitable, but put a ton of radiation into our atmosphere and potentially kill off a large portion of the earths population (possibly leading to plants in other countries not being monitored well enough and melting down as well).

Honestly if you have at least 5 miles between plants it shouldn't be that big of a deal and in most of the world that is the case. Japan has a plant in Kata, Kaminoseki that is within 5 miles along with plants in Monju, Takahama, and mihama that are close enough to create a chain reaction. Such high density of plants is where the real danger starts as it takes one accident, or environmental hazard to cause massive damage.

Isolated plants are dangerous but mainly to the surrounding area and with any advanced warning people could be evacuated in plenty of time to avoid massive loss of life. There are plenty of backups at most plants for loss of power or structural damage etc so it's not a huge danger to be honest. The only place in the world I would say that has a high risk of a massive disaster from nuke plants is japan (Although Russia supposedly has many that are not very safe....it would only damage fairly small areas and have little impact on the world as a whole.

If the nuke plants that are damaged in Japan do melt down....it could lead to some world changes in the long run and have a huge impact on all of our lives.

This.

It's people like this that make people edgy around nuclear power because they've been misinformed and then spread it to the rest of the world.

 

[wulfy42]

100 miles is pretty extreme. You can certainly have elevated radiation within 100 miles (as I posted above was 100 miles away from a plant that is having problems and detected radiation levels 100x normal), but for the most part you would have plenty of time to evacuate if your more then 5 miles away from a plant.

I'd probably want to be at least 10 miles away to be very safe though hehe.....I mean what if i'm sleeping in the middle of the night or something?

I wouldn't want to be near a whole bunch of plants though. Having more then 2 within 5 miles of you....now that is scary.

 

[E-Penguin]

That's the problem, media outlets trying to use this situation to fuel an anti-nuclear agenda. It kinda pisses me off. People always compare current power plants with Chernobyl, disregarding how old, worn down and in disrepair that plant was. I'm certain that modern plants are built to withstand almost anything thrown at it, and sure enough, it took one of the largest earthquakes to date to bring the current situation about.

Do you know what happen if you flew a passenger plane into one of the giant "chimneys" of a nuclear reactor?

Nothing.

The plane would disintegrate on impact, leaving only a scratch.

 

[Wintermoot]

But why not use solar and wind power? It will never explode and produces absolutely no yellowcake. Why invest in a type of power which produces waste instead of clean ones which can potentially continue until the sun explodes in 5 million or so years.

because it would be to expensive and its dependent on the weather (no sun/wind= no energy)
it also requires more space to build solar panels or wind mils

 

[monkey jesus]

I live less than two miles from two AGR nuclear power stations. We're issued iodine tablets and are given evacuation information on a calendar on a yearly basis. We hear the muster sirens daily and occasionally the venting of steam. I have been present when the nuclear incident alarm has sounded because of an on-site event and have seen vast amounts of emergency service vehicles scream past on their way to the stations. Though the incident alarm is for power station staff only it can be heard a significant distance away. You're informed of emergency training exercises and alarm tests months in advance. It's genuinely terrifying when these things happen, no matter how prepared you are for an emergency, how many redundancies there are in the designs and whether or not you possess an intimate knowledge of the nuclear process.

This I think is the core of the problem, I lived within two miles of a coal-fired power station and it only really registered it's presence when I had to drive past it, I never really thought about the dangers. I work in Lancaster and I'm more aware of the dangers from Heysham. For those not in the know Heysham is a nuclear power station in Lancashire in the UK.

I am however is the rare position of being married to a Nuclear Physicist who specialises in environmental protection from power stations etc. The long term health dangers of being next to a gas or coal fired power station are much worse than a nuclear one.

The current release from the Japanese stations are mostly semi damaging particles that have ended up embedded in the dust released from the hydrogen explosion, its only dangerous if you manage to breath it it, it's alpha and beta so it won't penetrate skin. However if I lived nearby I would be getting the fuck out of dodge.

Bearing in mind that Nuclear Power safety generate half my household income I do support it, but only as a stopgap measure until cleaner alternatives methods can be relied upon.

I'll leave you with: We hate that which we fear and we fear that which we do not understand (I can't remember who I ripped that off from)

 

[Wintermoot]

100 miles is pretty extreme. You can certainly have elevated radiation within 100 miles (as I posted above was 100 miles away from a plant that is having problems and detected radiation levels 100x normal), but for the most part you would have plenty of time to evacuate if your more then 5 miles away from a plant.

I'd probably want to be at least 10 miles away to be very safe though hehe.....I mean what if i'm sleeping in the middle of the night or something?

I wouldn't want to be near a whole bunch of plants though. Having more then 2 within 5 miles of you....now that is scary.

I think that most plants are built as far away from big cities and living areas (only a idiot would built a plant in a living area)

 

[wulfy42]

They are more then "slightly" dangerous especially in areas where there are many plants close together. Nowhere in the world has more nuclear plant density then Japan...and if things go bad it could end up being a world wide problem.

Thing is the rods need to stay cooled for something like 40 years after they are used. IF they do not they can meltdown which not only releases alot of heat but also a ton of radiation. Chernobyl (sp) was a good example of what could happen....but there are a ton of nuclear plants in japan (around 60 right now I think)and it just takes one plant melting down to put all the others in danger through a chain reaction that could not only leave all of japan uninhabitable, but put a ton of radiation into our atmosphere and potentially kill off a large portion of the earths population (possibly leading to plants in other countries not being monitored well enough and melting down as well).

Honestly if you have at least 5 miles between plants it shouldn't be that big of a deal and in most of the world that is the case. Japan has a plant in Kata, Kaminoseki that is within 5 miles along with plants in Monju, Takahama, and mihama that are close enough to create a chain reaction. Such high density of plants is where the real danger starts as it takes one accident, or environmental hazard to cause massive damage.

Isolated plants are dangerous but mainly to the surrounding area and with any advanced warning people could be evacuated in plenty of time to avoid massive loss of life. There are plenty of backups at most plants for loss of power or structural damage etc so it's not a huge danger to be honest. The only place in the world I would say that has a high risk of a massive disaster from nuke plants is japan (Although Russia supposedly has many that are not very safe....it would only damage fairly small areas and have little impact on the world as a whole.

If the nuke plants that are damaged in Japan do melt down....it could lead to some world changes in the long run and have a huge impact on all of our lives.

This.

It's people like this that make people edgy around nuclear power because they played Fallout and did the maths wrong..

What is wrong with what I said? When a plant "melts down" it releases alot of heat and often causes explosions. It can also increase radiation levels over a very wide area. This is happening right now in fact in plants with all the state of the art safety measures. A single plant is dangerous to the surrounding area, but multiple plants in a small area are far worse. 1 strong earthquake might cause all of them to have problems and the resources available in the area would be stretched very thin between multiple plants. If one plant melts down it would make keeping the others from doing the same almost impossible.

Everyone loves to say how safe the new Nuke plants are...but evidence that we are seeing right now seems to contradict that.

 

[GotMalkAvian]

People have been afraid of nuclear power pretty much since we first saw what a nuclear bomb could do. Most people were willing to kind of push the fear aside for the sake of cheap clean power, but disasters like Chernobyl and the recent explosion in Japan send all of those fears roaring back to the forefront.

 

[wulfy42]

100 miles is pretty extreme. You can certainly have elevated radiation within 100 miles (as I posted above was 100 miles away from a plant that is having problems and detected radiation levels 100x normal), but for the most part you would have plenty of time to evacuate if your more then 5 miles away from a plant.

I'd probably want to be at least 10 miles away to be very safe though hehe.....I mean what if i'm sleeping in the middle of the night or something?

I wouldn't want to be near a whole bunch of plants though. Having more then 2 within 5 miles of you....now that is scary.

I think that most plants are built as far away from big cities and living areas (only a idiot would built a plant in a living area)

Hence why I said it was mainly a large danger in Japan where the plants are often in very populated areas. Although from some of the posts on here (Someone was mentioning living within 5 miles of 2 plants with a 3rd being built) it may not only be Japan that has such situations in the near future.

 

[Thaluikhain]

I recently saw in the news that people in Russia demonstrated against nuclear power plants after they heard that three Japanese power plants where going critical. I personally think its stupid to protest against them because stuff like this only happens in extreme situations (a earthquake like this doesn't happen often and buildings are designed to resist quakes)

Strictly speaking, reactors go critical all the time. They don't work unless they are critical. Someone should have found a less scary sounding phrase for something that is part of their usual functioning.

Secondly, Russia possesses the most nuclear weapons in the world. Those are designed to actually kill people...they utitlise alot of scary sounding words just like power plants do, but they actually are fairly frightening.

Come back with solar power and wind farms and then we can start talking (In Australia's case the amount of sun and wind we get would power our nation easily on them, just imagine the Simpson desert full of solar power panels)

Wind and solar power simply isn't practical, and won't be for ages. Collecting and transporting power is difficult enough (covering the Simpson desert in anything is no small feat, let alone complicated machinery), but there's no feasible method (yet) of storing solar power during the night. Maybe in 50 years, but not now.

What is wrong with what I said?

According to the link provided earlier, everything.

http://theenergycollective.com/barrybrook/53461/fukushima-nuclear-accident-simple-and-accurate-explanation

The piece being written by an actual scientist, not a sensation hungry journalist.

 

[Wintermoot]

I recently saw in the news that people in Russia demonstrated against nuclear power plants after they heard that three Japanese power plants where going critical. I personally think its stupid to protest against them because stuff like this only happens in extreme situations (a earthquake like this doesn't happen often and buildings are designed to resist quakes)
discuss

Why would Russians fear nuclear power plants?! What the Chernobyl is wrong with these people?!

I get it that Chernobyl was a disaster but all the power plants that are currently working are ALLOT safer then Chernobyl