Now are you convinced that nuclear power plants are a bad idea?

Caledonia

An earthquake can happen anywhere on earth. Japan Nuclear Reactor EXPLOSION Fukushima Meltdown Radioactive FALLOUThttp://www. youtube. com/watch? v=LvC4WQrQw…Explosion at Japan nuke plant, disaster toll riseshttp://www. newstimes. com/news/article/Sh…BREAKING: EXPLOSION ROCKS NUCLEAR PLANT AT FUKUSHIMA



Grady

INJURIES, PLUMES OF SMOKE, WALLS COLLAPSEDhttp://www. bradblog. com/?p=8390



Carlisle

I already knew they were a bad idea. Nuclear energy is uneconomical compared to other sources. Plutonium is the most toxic substance in existence. The waste problem hasn't been solved. Nuclear reactors produce plutonium, together with plutonium is terrible because it behind be used grate on nerves make bombs. Nuclear reactors are predisposed to have accidents beside autocratic consequences for humanitarianism. (Doesn't sire to be decamp an earthquake.)Radiation retreat manipulation atomic reactors, uranium mining plus additional atomic activities mutilation selflessness. Energy forced to prove false generated locally moderately than by important knack stations. The risk grate on nerves an discontinuous informed on harm from a nuclear mishap is an unconsidered risk, as compared grate on nerves the much larger risk from propelling a vehicle, which is uncoerced. I am sickened to listen the bad info retire Japan. The pictures on tap Bradblog are brutal, alongside that whole building suddenly gone. You can see the belching forth hint at the video. Thanks in the matter of posting the urls. Hey, if you guys are all so mad as a March hare about them, push them in YOUR neighborhood, inevitably mine. fh



Ducor

No, actually, this shows how safe nuclear power actually is in tectonically stable areas. People have known for years that nuclear power in Japan, which sits on the ring of fire, is not really a good idea. If they wanted to do it correctly, they should have basically built better quality nuclear reactors (which do exist). But, I am sure they cut corners, to save money. That's the Japanese way. They knew very well they were taking a risk when they built the reactors, which is why they are right on the coast, where the fallout would predominately travel across the pacific ocean. Fortunately, from what I am reading, they have been able to keep the radiation level relatively low. (Although, what you read, and the truth are often two completely different things.) Overall, for the power it generates, nuclear is very safe, and can be made much safer in the future. So, again, my answer is no.



Avenal

This is a disaster waiting to happen. We are literally playing with fire. The accident at the Three Mile Island and the melt-down in Chernobyl had nothing to do with earthquakes. It costs over $2 billion to build a reactor and we still have not figured out how to safely store the radioactive rods. An old technology from the days of Cold War that is neither safe or cheap. In the era of Internet, there are decentralized technologies we can use to collect energy.



Ridgefield Park

No. Nuclear power still remains the safest and cleanest form of energy. All your options simply won't even work on the scale necessary to replace nuclear. We do need to pour money into energy research and we are, but we will likely never replace nuclear. Just as Chernobyl was not a good reason to get rid of nuclear plants neither was this. That there has not been a full blown meltdown resulting in thousands of deaths and serious radiation exposure just shows us how safe nuclear energy is under the worst conditions.



Grand Cane

No. How many people die in car accidents every year? NOW are you convinced drilling for oil is a bad idea? How many explosions are caused by natural gas every year? NOW are you convinced natural gas use is a bad idea? As soon as you figure out an effective, safe and profitable way to produce energy, let us know about it. We don't even know yet what's going on in Japan, there are no clear answers at the moment. Why don't we wait before you go around crying the sky is falling.



Hurley

You don't get to isolate one plant that was simply put in the wrong place as a way to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Reality just does not work that way. If you had asked the question, "Why isn't every single person who signed off on putting a nuclear power plant in one of the most seismically active places in the world PROSECUTED TO THE FULLEST EXTENT OF THE LAW?" I'd have been on the same page with you. Using a bad example of something with which to form an argument against that thing just doesn't work.



Arrow Point

It proves how stupid humans really are. The Japanese considered one of the most engineering wise people on earth that building a nuke plant in a quake zone only needs to be built to the standards of the "average" quake strength not build it for "the big one".Fear not though when it melts down and begins to burn a hole in the earths crust the nearby sea will hopefully rush in to extinguish it.



Newberry

No, though building them on faultlines is probably not a great idea. They're still probably the least bad option, and almost certainly the cheapest, for electricity generation in the medium term.



Burlington

Show me where thorium is as volatile as Uranium and I will say that nuclear power is not the future. But you won't be able to do that. Thorium based nuclear energy is the best option out there by a long shot.



St. Elizabeth

Do you have a suggestion for a source of power that would be available in the amounts we need to support our economy? I am aware that it took an 8.9 quake to do this, how many of those have we had?



Browning

no. driving a car is 19 times more deadly than flying. NOW are you conviced that driving is a bad idea???typical liberal pap.



Green River

Near or on fault lines yes, other then that they are a proven source of safe energy for the USA. Other countries may be stupid, but we have been using nuclear power for many decades safely.



Hawaiian Acres

No, an 8.9 earthquake cannot happen anywhere on earth. You get to list this one under "shyte happens".



Chokoloskee

No. Some idiot stuck in in JAPAN. Seismically active. It took an 8.9 to take that sucker out. Largest one that nation has ever seen.



Everson

You make the same for building anything which would be dumb in my eyes.



Corning

No. We need power. Solar and wind isn't going to cut it.



La Salle

No.



Espino

No.



Sebastian

Nope



Cottage Grove

no