| Entry: Hot Vacation Spot |  | = Official Comment |
|
|
|
From Curtis Sawyer
Website: http://ussexcalibur.blogspot.com |
| While I agree that Chernobyl was a terrible event, and that governments experimenting on their citizens without their knowledge or consent is a very bad thing, I've yet to be convinced that nuclear power is itself a bad thing. I'm sure that burning coal and the particulate matter that releases into the atmosphere also causes lots of medical problems. I'm not sure that elimination of nuclear power is the answer (which is what Greenpeace wants to happen). |
|
|
| From JW |
| One of the most interesting things that's come out of the Chernobyl accident is a resurgence in the native wildlife in the fallout zone. Apparently, these animals are highly radioactive but otherwise completely fine and as an added bonus for the animals no one will hunt these animals because to eat them is to die. Of course directly after the meltdown there was a terrible loss of animal life, but now, years later, native species are flourishing whereas before the accident they were all but extinct. Facinating commentary on the power of nature to overcome and adapt. |
|
|
| From Jessica |
Interesting. Do you have sources? I've read otherwise:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6946210.stm
And here's a map:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/guides/456900/456957/html/nn3page1.stm |
|
|
From Curtis Sawyer
Website: http://ussexcalibur.blogspot.com |
I do:
Safety of Nuclear Power Reactors (Admittedly, probably a bit biased, but you cannot argue with the fact that there have "only been two major reactor accidents in the history of civil nuclear power - Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. One was contained without harm to anyone and the other involved an intense fire without provision for containment. These are the only major accidents to have occurred in more than 12,700 cumulative reactor-years of commercial operation in 32 countries.").
And here is some information on the air pollution caused by Coal Power |
|
|
| From JW |
Upon re-reading my comment I presented it as a bit more cut and dried that it actually is but an interesting read is:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/
2006/04/0426_060426_chernobyl.html
If I get a chance, I'll try to find the other articles I've read. None of them are uniformly positive, but it is an interesting perspective. |
|
|
| From JW |
| I am fairly certain that it was the article referenced in the BBC article that I read. What's intersting is the uniformly the negative aspects are with respect to the bird population and most specifically the barn swallows. Birds are always one of the most sensitive species (at the risk of quoting the Police - i.e. the canary in a coal mine) and I don't think it is possible to extrapolate to large species (Wild Boar if I remember the article correct was a prime example). In any case, none of the articles I've read on the subject suggest that there is no impact, simply that it was suprising the the impact wasn't necessarily as bad as it seemed and that the human influence was far more detrimental to the animal populations that the radiation. |
|
|
| From Jessica |
I agree that the idea is interesting. Is it bad that it doesn't shock me that it is possible that the sum of human influences is worse on nature than one catastrophic nuclear event? Regardless, (to answer Curt) how about we get rid of nuclear and coal power. Both are harmful in different ways. Nuclear power, despite its efficiencies, quite frankly freaks me out. Forgive me if I don’t trust complete strangers in a totally different country to operate things properly so as not to affect me and my fellow humans via nuclear fallout. The impact of one mistake is just too high: It’s dangerous. And you can’t just get rid of those cores. Furthermore, I don’t think the US would be capable of taking care of a nuclear crisis-accident. We can’t even handle a hurricane. Imagine if everyone involved in Katrina also had sickness from radiation. The implications... It's a hard thing: Will our society ever learn when to stop?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fallout |
|
|
From Curtis Sawyer
Website: http://ussexcalibur.blogspot.com |
What probably freaks you out about Nuclear power is what makes everyone (even me) a little nervous about it - if there is a problem the potential for a near-global disaster. If a coal plant has a problem the toll in human lives will be much smaller than what would happen if the Lake Anna plant were to go critical and lose containment.
I think what everyone needs to do if you really want to get away from these sources of energy is to select energy providers with green sources. I pay more per kwH of electricity because I signed up for wind power. There are also other green options.
Just changing out your regular light bulbs for those low energy ones saves a large amount of pollution. There are lots of things people can do to help. |
|
|
