Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
I rather enjoyed reading it.
In the end:
catmistake - they've failed before, it doesn't matter how they would be built today, they will fail again.
khallow - modern designs are far safer then almost all other reactors currently operational.
The fact that catmistake made some serious factual errors, yet still kept pushing his point is 'so' classic.
Khallow diminishing the loss of life will almost always cause the faint hearted to get mad.
I could keep pushing the comparisons, but it would be mean.
My personal opinion is that all those articles comparing the fukushima accident with chernobyl are fear mongering. If my memories of 1 of the IEEE articles I read on fukushima was accurate, the larger radiation amounts are from low half time stuff, that will diminish quickly. So maybe things have changed since that article, but saying fukushima is as bad as chernobyl is stupid and fear mongering. As is chernobyl compared to coal mining and coal plants is laughable.
My over all opinion is that nuclear is the only way to go in the foreseeable future. That newer designs that are fail-safe, in that they will shut down automatically and safely if everything else fails, are the best bet till something like fusion comes along. I love the thought of solar panels, I would have them on my roof if the HOA didn't ban them, and they had a payoff time of more like 5 yrs instead of 20 yrs (been a while since I looked at data on it.)