I'm really disappointed by the tone of the coverage of the nuclear power plant damage. Here we have what is probably very close to a worst-case scenario (a nearby 8.9 magnitude earthquake and resulting tsunami), and not only has no one been killed by the damage to the nuclear power plant, any contamination is being for the most part contained to the plant.
Compare that to last year's Deepwater Horizon explosion, which killed 11 people, did an enormous amount of damage to the local environment and economy, yet was not triggered by any natural disaster whatsoever: it just happened.
And yet we have this irrational fear of nuclear power, when all of the evidence points to coal and oil as being more dangerous to both humans and wildlife.
I'm really disappointed by the tone of the coverage of the nuclear power plant damage. Here we have what is probably very close to a worst-case scenario (a nearby 8.9 magnitude earthquake and resulting tsunami), and not only has no one been killed by the damage to the nuclear power plant, any contamination is being for the most part contained to the plant.
ReplyDeleteCompare that to last year's Deepwater Horizon explosion, which killed 11 people, did an enormous amount of damage to the local environment and economy, yet was not triggered by any natural disaster whatsoever: it just happened.
And yet we have this irrational fear of nuclear power, when all of the evidence points to coal and oil as being more dangerous to both humans and wildlife.
You make valid points, but President Obama and I still have high hopes for clean coal.
ReplyDelete