BREAKING NEWS: Second explosion at Japanese nuclear power plant

[QUOTE="comp_atkins"][QUOTE="GabuEx"]

The death total from Chernobyl was 50.

I will repeat that.

The death total from Chernobyl, which used an outdated and inherently dangerous design, which suffered from complete and utter denial on the part of the Soviet Union, and which everyone points to as an example of the extreme dangers of nuclear power... was 50.

50 whole deaths have been attributed to the fallout from the accident at Chernobyl, which has become the worldwide nuclear boogeyman.

In contrast, over 6,000 coal miners died in China just in 2004.

Nuclear power is literally the safest form of energy in the world in terms of the number of deaths related to the acquisition of the fuel and to the operation of the power plant and the accidents therein.

DroidPhysX

50? The head of the Soviets overviewing the disaster @ the IAEA conference in the 80s said it would be 40,000. But then the west got scared and bottled it down to 4000. Which still triumphs over the 50.

The current death toll is 50. That is a number that comes directly from the IAEA, the WHO, and the UNDP in a 2005 report on the matter that comes from an international team of 100 scientists. That death toll could rise to around 4,000 if everyone who currently has a serious affliction related to Chernobyl dies. The survival rate of thyroid cancer as a result of Chernobyl was around 99%. 4,000 is not a small number, but it is rather small in comparison to the death tolls associated with other forms of production of electrical power.

And that's even with all of the secrecy and denial that came from the Soviet Union, which inhibited proper safety measures, and all of the faulty design that made the disaster possible, which was not present in these reactors (and thus made a second Chernobyl never really a possibility in the first place).

They're wasting time at this point. Instead of trying to cool the reactors, they should be trying perma-seal them.

It's impossible to cool them now. The rodsprobably flash boil the water they contact and the coolant itself will become radioactive waste once it's spent... what the hell are they going to with that stuff then?

They should just assume Chernobly with ALL of the damaged reactors and perma-seal them. Wait 50 years and then get in there and clean up the mess then.

Otherwise they're going to contaminate the whole island and then nobody will be able to live within 20 miles or more of those plants in any direction for decades.

Netherscourge

No offense, but it's this kind of misinformation that makes people needlessly antsy about nuclear energy. :P

The main bulk of the radioactive material is not exposed to the water. What the water is cooling is rods within which the radioactive material sits. Without the water, the rods have the capacity to melt right through the floor and into the soil below. That is what is referred to as a core meltdown, and poses a significantly greater risk of meaningful contamination. That is what the coolant is intended to prevent. If they stop pumping in sea water, that is exactly what will happen.

Let's be clear: the control rods have done their job and the nuclear reaction itself has stopped. No further heat will be generated. What we need to do now is cool them down and let that heat dissipate in order to prevent a core meltdown. If we can do that, then we're in the clear. The steam vented contains a minimal amount of radioactive material, but nothing that poses a concern to public health and safety. At this point, the only danger to public health and safety is a core meltdown.

Those "small" hydrogen explosions are probably spewingmoderate amountsof radiation in every direction anyway - at least with controlled venting they can reduce the contamination radius to a few miles instead of dozens of miles.

Not that it matters anyway. I don't think they can reverse nuclear fission in a small, unstable, contaminated environment. I just don't see anything good on the horizon for this. Those rods need to be permanently submerged and they don't have the systems in place anymore to do that. Hell, they still have aftershocks and quakes in the 5+ range in that area.

Uranium rods are designed to stay hot for a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG time. This whole thing is terrible.

Netherscourge

No, they are not. A nuclear reactor has many levels of containment. Those hydrogen explosions only breached the outer wall of the reactor, whose purpose was not and never was to keep radioactive material out. The explosions did not breach the containment vessels, which are made of extremely thick and durable steel. The explosions did not result in widespread release of radioactive material.

Seriously, please learn about these things before propagating misinformation that comes from fear.

[QUOTE="Netherscourge"]

They're wasting time at this point. Instead of trying to cool the reactors, they should be trying perma-seal them.

It's impossible to cool them now. The rodsprobably flash boil the water they contact and the coolant itself will become radioactive waste once it's spent... what the hell are they going to with that stuff then?

They should just assume Chernobly with ALL of the damaged reactors and perma-seal them. Wait 50 years and then get in there and clean up the mess then.

Otherwise they're going to contaminate the whole island and then nobody will be able to live within 20 miles or more of those plants in any direction for decades.

GabuEx

No offense, but it's this kind of misinformation that makes people needlessly antsy about nuclear energy. :P

The main bulk of the radioactive material is not exposed to the water. What the water is cooling is rods within which the radioactive material sits. Without the water, the rods have the capacity to melt right through the floor and into the soil below. That is what is referred to as a core meltdown, and poses a significantly greater risk of meaningful contamination. That is what the coolant is intended to prevent. If they stop pumping in sea water, that is exactly what will happen.

Let's be clear: the control rods have done their job and the nuclear reaction itself has stopped. No further heat will be generated. What we need to do now is cool them down and let that heat dissipate in order to prevent a core meltdown. If we can do that, then we're in the clear. The steam vented contains a minimal amount of radioactive material, but nothing that poses a concern to public health and safety. At this point, the only danger to public health and safety is a core meltdown.

Not doubting your knowledge Gabu (I don't know much about nuclear energy) but Sky was reporting that radiation levels near the reactors are approaching levels which would have an impact on human health - and telling people 20-30km away to stay indoors.Ravensmash

That's definitely a concern, but the levels of radiation are still relatively low, and officials have said the inner containment vessel is still intact. If the radioactive material reaches the soil beneath the power plant, that's definitely the #1 nightmare scenario, which is why avoiding that is the #1 top priority. Any airborne radioactive material can be counteracted; the main thing that causes cancer in that case is when your thyroid starts processing radioactive iodine that you ingest, which is why the Japanese government is distributing iodine tablets (if your body is processing that iodine, it won't process the radioactive iodine). The openness of the Japanese regarding what's going on and their willingness to act to protect the population is another reason why this won't be another Chernobyl; the Soviet Union literally did **** all in response to that accident.

Anderson Cooper said that the worst case scenario would be Chernobyl x 3. I seriously hope not.

Anderson Cooper said that the worst case scenario would be Chernobyl x 3. I seriously hope not.

Big_Pecks

Chernobyl x 3? Not a chance. I heard Three Mile Island x 3 on one occasion, which doesn't really make much sense since the death toll from Three Mile Island was 0, so I'm not sure how you can evaluate that it was three times worse than zero deaths, but there you go.

[QUOTE="Big_Pecks"]

Anderson Cooper said that the worst case scenario would be Chernobyl x 3. I seriously hope not.

GabuEx

Chernobyl x 3? Not a chance. I heard Three Mile Island x 3 on one occasion, which doesn't really make much sense since the death toll from Three Mile Island was 0, so I'm not sure how you can evaluate that it was three times worse than zero deaths, but there you go.

Damn news..Scaring everyone..Its bad but not Cernobyle.

Gamespot just put up a Banner for donations..FYI.

I was watching CBS Evening news and it sounds like the Engineers at the plant have a pretty firm grip on the situation, saying that absolute worst scenario is slim to none. Japans situation now is not even Comparable the the Three Mile Island incident in 1979. People and the news are overhyping the situation to get people worked up. Its like we unconciously want to see the worst happen.

I was watching CBS Evening news and it sounds like the Engineers at the plant have a pretty firm grip on the situation, saying that absolute worst scenario is slim to none. Japans situation now is not even Comparable the the Three Mile Island incident in 1979. People and the news are overhyping the situation to get people worked up. Its like we unconciously want to see the worst happen.

battousai188

[QUOTE="battousai188"]

I was watching CBS Evening news and it sounds like the Engineers at the plant have a pretty firm grip on the situation, saying that absolute worst scenario is slim to none. Japans situation now is not even Comparable the the Three Mile Island incident in 1979. People and the news are overhyping the situation to get people worked up. Its like we unconciously want to see the worst happen.

Crossel777

[QUOTE="Crossel777"]

[QUOTE="battousai188"]

I was watching CBS Evening news and it sounds like the Engineers at the plant have a pretty firm grip on the situation, saying that absolute worst scenario is slim to none. Japans situation now is not even Comparable the the Three Mile Island incident in 1979. People and the news are overhyping the situation to get people worked up. Its like we unconciously want to see the worst happen.

Ace6301

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vc_6LYVMw2c

http://livelive24.com/live-tv/japan-nhk-world.html

http://www.republicreport.com/massive-explosions-radiationheightens-japans-nuclear-fears-as-180000-evacuated-reports/

and check your news channel.

[QUOTE="Crossel777"]

[QUOTE="battousai188"]

I was watching CBS Evening news and it sounds like the Engineers at the plant have a pretty firm grip on the situation, saying that absolute worst scenario is slim to none. Japans situation now is not even Comparable the the Three Mile Island incident in 1979. People and the news are overhyping the situation to get people worked up. Its like we unconciously want to see the worst happen.

Ace6301

This took place at reactor No. 4

http://rt.com/news/officials-explosion-fukoshima-claims/

I guess this is when the zombies rise....

No word yet on the fourth explosion.

The higher levels of radiation in Japan are normal after a large earthquake. Radon gas is typically higher than normal after major quakes.

As of right now, getting a CT scan is worse for you than being at the power plant radiation dose wise.

Norm Rubin, director of nuclear power research at Energy Probe, said the engineers and staff at the plant "are scrambling and doing Hail Mary passes to try to keep the fuel rods inside those reactors cool enough that they don't run dry, fail and melt." "That's the worst case scenario at this point," he told CTV News Channel Monday. Rubin said as much as three-quarters of the 3.7-metre high bundles of nuclear fuel rods were completely exposed when the coolant leaked away, allowing them to heat to almost unimaginable temperatures. "That's a serious no-no, because unless this material is cooled it is generating enough heat … an amazing amount of heat," he said. "And if you don't take that heat away the stuff that's producing the heat overheats: it just keeps getting hotter." He added: "Something has to take this heat away or else things go very badly … Rubin said that this is the first time so many reactors in one place have threatened to melt down at the same time, adding another layer of danger to the equation. "This is uncharted territory … we've never been in a situation where more than one reactor is in crisis at the same time at the same facility. This is new." fromhttp://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/World/20110315/japan-nuclear-reactors-radiation-110315/

Sounds pretty bad to me.

Norm Rubin, director of nuclear power research at Energy Probe, said the engineers and staff at the plant "are scrambling and doing Hail Mary passes to try to keep the fuel rods inside those reactors cool enough that they don't run dry, fail and melt." "That's the worst case scenario at this point," he told CTV News Channel Monday. Rubin said as much as three-quarters of the 3.7-metre high bundles of nuclear fuel rods were completely exposed when the coolant leaked away, allowing them to heat to almost unimaginable temperatures. "That's a serious no-no, because unless this material is cooled it is generating enough heat … an amazing amount of heat," he said. "And if you don't take that heat away the stuff that's producing the heat overheats: it just keeps getting hotter." He added: "Something has to take this heat away or else things go very badly … Rubin said that this is the first time so many reactors in one place have threatened to melt down at the same time, adding another layer of danger to the equation. "This is uncharted territory … we've never been in a situation where more than one reactor is in crisis at the same time at the same facility. This is new." fromhttp://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/World/20110315/japan-nuclear-reactors-radiation-110315/

Sounds pretty bad to me.

Melting is much better than what happened at Chernobyl. The particles were blown into the air which caused the massive radiation contamination. The worst case scenario for melting is the entire reactor melts through the containment structure and contaminates the surrounding area through the ground water although it being by the sea will dilute it quickly. It will not create a "radiation cloud" though which was Chernobyl's problem.

That's why we should not have Nuclear Power.

That's why we should not have Nuclear Power.

rockerbikie

That's why we should not have Nuclear Power.

rockerbikie

If this is why we shouldn't have Nuclear power, there is an even bigger case for abolishing fossil fuel power plants.

[QUOTE="rockerbikie"]

That's why we should not have Nuclear Power.

Ace6301

But there was an EXPLOSION! Nuclear power * explosion = NUCLEAR EXPLOSION!!!

Honestly though, the whole mindless fear of nuclear power routine has gone from mildly humorous to obnoxious.

That's why we should not have Nuclear Power.

rockerbikie

[QUOTE="rockerbikie"]

That's why we should not have Nuclear Power.

HoolaHoopMan

[QUOTE="rockerbikie"]

That's why we should not have Nuclear Power.

HoolaHoopMan

Not to mention, the Gulf spill actually killed people.

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"][QUOTE="rockerbikie"]

That's why we should not have Nuclear Power.

coolbeans90

Not to mention, the Gulf spill actually killed people.

it seems people actually think it's going to blow up like a h-bomb?

chernobyl was just one horribly horribly designed with many shortcuts and was destined to fail.

in china alone about half a million people die from air pollution every year.

people that campaign against nuclear energy as "dangerous" are just dumb beyond words when it's the cleanest thing we have at the moment.

This is rediculous. I hope nothing else happens to Japan, they've been through far too much.

[QUOTE="Tangmashi"]

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]cant wait for hippies to use this event to denounce nuclear power, as if 8.9 earthquakes are a regular occurrenceGabuEx

If this happened to Japan, it could happen to any nation. Least of all the US which is most likely even less prepared for a catastropheof this magnitude than japan is.

Again, look at Katrina. Our Government and our State was so inept and incompetent when they knew that hurricane was going to hit New Orleans weeks in advance. Within hours Japan has evacuated hundreds of thousands of it's population in response to this disaster.

If "this" happened - what is "this"? An ancient nuclear reactor withstanding an extremely strong earthquake and tsunami with only minimal radiation leak that is insufficient to cause a danger to public health and safety? If that's our nuclear reactor doomsday scenario, then I'd say we're doing pretty darn good as far as nuclear power is concerned.

Ancient? ROFL, what?

It wasn't the greeks or romans that built this reactor 5,000 years ago, and it certainly was not built during the High Middle Ages, your statement is ridiculous. Not something that is 40 years old, and when you have nuclear reactors built in california that lies on a teutonic fault line that are even older than that ANCIENT reactor built by those japanese who we all know never build things to last :roll: If it can happen to Japan, it could happen to us on the West Coast. That's all I am implying and perhaps CAUTION is needed before we too get a 8.9 earthquake on the west coast.

Your statement of Chernobyl is equally laughable. 50 people died tops, give or take. But the damage done is not counted in just how many people lost their lives. It's in the lives that it destroyed and the livelihoods that were cut short and destroyed. The hundreds of thousands of children that were born with genetic defects, without their limbsand mental retardation brought upon by radiation poisoning. That is true devestation caused by Chernobyl. That not just your 50 deaths, it's the living that's hard.

I can't even show the images on here of the children that were effected by nuclear poisioning due to how horrible and grusome they are.

But don't worry, that happened 25 years ago. It's ANCIENT history :roll:

No word yet on the fourth explosion.

The higher levels of radiation in Japan are normal after a large earthquake. Radon gas is typically higher than normal after major quakes.

As of right now, getting a CT scan is worse for you than being at the power plant radiation dose wise.

subyman

One of the plants has been evacuated (skeleton crew remains to keep cooling efforts going) and radiations levels have surpassed Three Mile Island. People within 30km of this plant have been ordered to stay inside their homes if they haven't been evacuated.

This is not normal. I'drather havethe CT scan.

Kinda silly to build nuclear power plants in an earthquake prone area.. even though they haven't had a quake reaching that high, they get quakes a LOT. Did they really think they'd never get a bad one?Rattlesnake_8

Ancient? ROFL, what?

It wasn't the greeks or romans that built this reactor 5,000 years ago, and it certainly was not built during the High Middle Ages, your statement is ridiculous. Not something that is 40 years old, and when you have nuclear reactors built in california that lies on a teutonic fault line that are even older than that ANCIENT reactor built by those japanese who we all know never build things to last :roll: If it can happen to Japan, it could happen to us on the West Coast. That's all I am implying and perhaps CAUTION is needed before we too get a 8.9 earthquake on the west coast.

Your statement of Chernobyl is equally laughable. 50 people died tops, give or take. But the damage done is not counted in just how many people lost their lives. It's in the lives that it destroyed and the livelihoods that were cut short and destroyed. The hundreds of thousands of children that were born with genetic defects, without their limbsand mental retardation brought upon by radiation poisoning. That is true devestation caused by Chernobyl. That not just your 50 deaths, it's the living that's hard.

I can't even show the images on here of the children that were effected by nuclear poisioning due to how horrible and grusome they are.

But don't worry, that happened 25 years ago. It's ANCIENT history :roll:

Tangmashi

Look the term "ancient" up in a dictionary. There should be more than one definition. One of them simply being something to the affect of "old-fashion; antiquated". Which this plant definitely is.

No matter what damage Chernobyl caused, it still cannot compare what fossil fuels do on an annual basis.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="Tangmashi"]

If this happened to Japan, it could happen to any nation. Least of all the US which is most likely even less prepared for a catastropheof this magnitude than japan is.

Again, look at Katrina. Our Government and our State was so inept and incompetent when they knew that hurricane was going to hit New Orleans weeks in advance. Within hours Japan has evacuated hundreds of thousands of it's population in response to this disaster.

Tangmashi

If "this" happened - what is "this"? An ancient nuclear reactor withstanding an extremely strong earthquake and tsunami with only minimal radiation leak that is insufficient to cause a danger to public health and safety? If that's our nuclear reactor doomsday scenario, then I'd say we're doing pretty darn good as far as nuclear power is concerned.

Ancient? ROFL, what?

It wasn't the greeks or romans that built this reactor 5,000 years ago, and it certainly was not built during the High Middle Ages, your statement is ridiculous. Not something that is 40 years old, and when you have nuclear reactors built in california that lies on a teutonic fault line that are even older than that ANCIENT reactor built by those japanese who we all know never build things to last :roll: If it can happen to Japan, it could happen to us on the West Coast. That's all I am implying and perhaps CAUTION is needed before we too get a 8.9 earthquake on the west coast.

Your statement of Chernobyl is equally laughable. 50 people died tops, give or take. But the damage done is not counted in just how many people lost their lives. It's in the lives that it destroyed and the livelihoods that were cut short and destroyed. The hundreds of thousands of children that were born with genetic defects, without their limbsand mental retardation brought upon by radiation poisoning. That is true devestation caused by Chernobyl. That not just your 50 deaths, it's the living that's hard.

I can't even show the images on here of the children that were effected by nuclear poisioning due to how horrible and grusome they are.

But don't worry, that happened 25 years ago. It's ANCIENT history :roll:

ITT: bunch of people who don't understand how nuclear power plants work listening to news reports from people who don't understand how nuclear power plants work. I find it funny that back in the 50s we still used to build homes in areas with high concentration of radon gas in Finland, which meant the people who lived in those houses were exposed to more radiation than the people close to the power plants at the moment, all throughout their lives.

BTW Tangmashi, you should read WHO's 2005 report on Chernobyl. It makes it clear that "the mental health impact of Chernobyl is the largest public health problem created by the accident" and states that "persistent myths and misperceptions about the threat of radiation have resulted in "paralyzing fatalism" among residents of affected areas."

There is no proof that Chernobyl would have caused an increase in birth defects by the way. All of the early reports that claimed increased infant mortality rates have also been disproved. "Repacholi concludes that the health effects of the accident were potentially horrific, but when you add them up using validated conclusions from good science, the public health effects were not nearly as substantial as had at first been feared."

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="Tangmashi"]

If this happened to Japan, it could happen to any nation. Least of all the US which is most likely even less prepared for a catastropheof this magnitude than japan is.

Again, look at Katrina. Our Government and our State was so inept and incompetent when they knew that hurricane was going to hit New Orleans weeks in advance. Within hours Japan has evacuated hundreds of thousands of it's population in response to this disaster.

Tangmashi

If "this" happened - what is "this"? An ancient nuclear reactor withstanding an extremely strong earthquake and tsunami with only minimal radiation leak that is insufficient to cause a danger to public health and safety? If that's our nuclear reactor doomsday scenario, then I'd say we're doing pretty darn good as far as nuclear power is concerned.

Ancient? ROFL, what?

It wasn't the greeks or romans that built this reactor 5,000 years ago, and it certainly was not built during the High Middle Ages, your statement is ridiculous. Not something that is 40 years old, and when you have nuclear reactors built in california that lies on a teutonic fault line that are even older than that ANCIENT reactor built by those japanese who we all know never build things to last :roll: If it can happen to Japan, it could happen to us on the West Coast. That's all I am implying and perhaps CAUTION is needed before we too get a 8.9 earthquake on the west coast.

Your statement of Chernobyl is equally laughable. 50 people died tops, give or take. But the damage done is not counted in just how many people lost their lives. It's in the lives that it destroyed and the livelihoods that were cut short and destroyed. The hundreds of thousands of children that were born with genetic defects, without their limbsand mental retardation brought upon by radiation poisoning. That is true devestation caused by Chernobyl. That not just your 50 deaths, it's the living that's hard.

I can't even show the images on here of the children that were effected by nuclear poisioning due to how horrible and grusome they are.

But don't worry, that happened 25 years ago. It's ANCIENT history :roll:

In terms of the progression of technology, yes, ancient. You clearly don't understand the differences between the reactor designs if you think that Chernobyl is in any way comparable to modern reactors. A key difference between the plants at Chernobyl and modern plants was the use of graphite moderators to slow the nuclear reactions. The graphite caught fire and burned for days and days, which contributed both to the vast bulk of pollution released into the atmosphere and to the complete inability to contain anything. Modern reactors use water as a moderator. Water, obviously, cannot catch fire.

Even the plants at Fukushima Daiichi are outdated, however. A key difference between those reactors and modern reactors is that those reactors required electrical power in order for their coolant systems to function. Modern reactors use natural convection processes, on the other hand, and thus require no electrical power. Had the plants at Fukushima Daiichi been modern reactors, they would have been perfectly fine. It's the complete loss of both main and backup power at the plants, leading to the failure of their coolant systems, that caused this crisis.

As for the health effects of the Chernobyl accident, I would encourage you to read this report from the IAEA, the WHO, and the UNDP. There is zero evidence that would indicate a heightened level of infertility or genetic deformities that came about as a result of the accident. Diseases associated with poverty and lifestyIe are a far greater danger to public health in the area than anything related to Chernobyl. Ironically, one of the most devastating effects in the region is, as the report puts it, a "devastating fatalism" brought on by myths and misconceptions about radiation - precisely those which anti-nuclear detractors continually propagate.

Even if Chernobyl had been as bad as you say, however, it would still grossly pale in comparison to the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico - and I don't see anyone yelling that we should abandon all oil production as a result of that accident. When accidents happen, you identify their causes, fix them, and move forward; you don't completely abandon everything. If we did that, we'd still be back in the dark ages.

Also, some good news today: radiation levels around Fukushima Daiichi have dropped significantlyafter yesterday's spike. Additionally, the fire at No. 4 is out, and Nos. 1 and 3 are now stable. No. 2 (the victim of the most recent explosion) is the only reactor still requiring stabilization.

There's still some cause for concern in other previously unaffected parts of the plant, but, barring any sudden lurches back to chaos, the situation may be normalizing without any core meltdowns having occurred.

Also, some good news today: radiation levels around Fukushima Daiichi have dropped significantlyafter yesterday's spike. Additionally, the fire at No. 4 is out, and Nos. 1 and 3 are now stable. No. 2 (the victim of the most recent explosion) is the only reactor still requiring stabilization.

There's still some cause for concern in other previously unaffected parts of the plant, but, barring any sudden lurches back to chaos, the situation may be normalizing without any core meltdowns having occurred.

GabuEx

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

Also, some good news today: radiation levels around Fukushima Daiichi have dropped significantlyafter yesterday's spike. Additionally, the fire at No. 4 is out, and Nos. 1 and 3 are now stable. No. 2 (the victim of the most recent explosion) is the only reactor still requiring stabilization.

There's still some cause for concern in other previously unaffected parts of the plant, but, barring any sudden lurches back to chaos, the situation may be normalizing without any core meltdowns having occurred.

sonicare

Oh, absolutely. If nothing else, I hope we can put this nuclear crisis behind us so we can focus on the actual disaster that has already happened.

There are a lot of misperceptions about Chernobyl, I will admit that. Not only were their reactors outdated by our current standards, they weren't up to safety regulations for the time when it happened. They cut a ton of corners in design, construction, and safety procedures and that's largely what led to it being so bad. They have built reactors nowadays that have automated safety procedures built in, they actually simulated the same conditions from Chernobyl and the computer was able to take care of it with no problem at all, no human input and the problem was completely averted.

However, I think there are some things that need clearing up. One, Chernobyl did have an environmental impact. Radiation level are high in areas near the plant to this day, and the wildlife in the surrounding areas was hit hard. The forests in the surrounding areas still aren't safe, and it will still take years for the forest to recover. Two, I don't think a lot of people in this thread should be so dismissive about concerns surrounding this. Yes, disaster seems to have been averted, thank god, but if something had gone wrong it could have been disaster level. I saw a projection of areas that would have been affected by radiation had a reactor melted down, it would have spread across the Pacific all the way to the midwest United States and parts of Canada and Mexico, that's freaking scary. Maybe that isn't a complete indictment of nuclear power, but it should be reason for caution. The Japanese thought they had all contingencies covered, and there have been points in this crisis where scenarios they thought they had covered ended up escalating. You can plan for scenarios all you want, sometimes it simply isn't enough. The fact that they (apparently) have gotten the situation under control is reassuring, but people still have a right to be concerned about these things.

I saw a projection of areas that would have been affected by radiation had a reactor melted down, it would have spread across the Pacific all the way to the midwest United States and parts of Canada and Mexico, that's freaking scary.

theone86

Out of curiosity, where is this?

[QUOTE="theone86"]

I saw a projection of areas that would have been affected by radiation had a reactor melted down, it would have spread across the Pacific all the way to the midwest United States and parts of Canada and Mexico, that's freaking scary.

GabuEx

Out of curiosity, where is this?