[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26984113[/url]
[quote]The Japanese government has approved an energy plan that backs the use of nuclear power, despite public anxiety after the Fukushima disaster.
The plan reverses an earlier decision to phase out nuclear power by a previous government.
It will set the stage for the government to restart some reactors, all of which are currently idled.
The move comes days after the first Fukushima evacuees returned to their homes inside the exclusion zone.
"We aim to opt for an energy supply system which is realistic, pragmatic and well balanced," Japanese Trade and Industry Minister Toshimitsu Motegi told reporters.[/quote]
Well, where else would they get power. Whaling?
Thats old, inefficient and barbar-
Oh wait...
[QUOTE=Squad1993;44516804]Well, where else would they get power. Whaling?
Oh wait...[/QUOTE]
[t]http://imgkk.com/i/7nlj.png[/t]
Yeah, why the hell not? It was an outdated plant that got hit with a tsunami [I]AND[/I] an earthquake at the same time (newer plants towards the epicentre were completely untouched), it's not indicative of the entire nuclear fleet.
Good.
Knee-Jerk reactions, like our governments' decision to switch over to "green" energy completely are just vote-grabs and not thought through.
I don't see the problem with nuclear energy anyway, every single argument about it is 'Think of Chernobyl!' or some deviation of that.
Good, good. We can use this as a counter to the "ERMAGERD CHERNOBYL" counter-arguments morons throw up against nuclear power.
Good on ya, Japan.
[QUOTE=Squad1993;44516804]Well, where else would they get power. Whaling?
Thats old, inefficient and barbar-
Oh wait...[/QUOTE]
[img]http://www.mobygames.com/images/shots/l/604363-dishonored-xbox-360-screenshot-whale-oil-is-the-energy-source.jpg[/img]
Now this time don't let the plant owner disregard basic safe operation practices.
I love when environmentalists or whoever, keep saying they want other stuff instead of nuclear power that's just as efficient and gives out just as much power.
And then I ask "Like what?". Still haven't gotten an answer.
If only we had a working fusion generator, then all this would be trivial.
[QUOTE=MasterFen006;44516813]Yeah, why the hell not? It was an outdated plant that got hit with a tsunami [I]AND[/I] an earthquake at the same time (newer plants towards the epicentre were completely untouched), it's not indicative of the entire nuclear fleet.[/QUOTE]
Wasn't even strictly a case of newer plants, so much as old plants that were actually fixed up and modernised as the IAEA had recommended. It was vast negligence on the part of the company owning the plant that caused it. If they'd have modernised 20 odd years ago (and figured out that storing backup generators in a basement might not be a good idea in case of tsunamis) then it would have been 100% fine.
I dont think a country with frequent earthquakes should invest in nuclear power. We all know what can go wrong.
[QUOTE=Fatfatfatty;44517437]I dont think a country with frequent earthquakes should invest in nuclear power. We all know what can go wrong.[/QUOTE]
Fukushima was the only plant affected by the earthquake, and that was only because it was outdated and it was also hit by a tsunami straight after.
[QUOTE=Fatfatfatty;44517437]I dont think a country with frequent earthquakes should invest in nuclear power. We all know what can go wrong.[/QUOTE]
Not this song and dance again.
Fukushima experienced negligible damage from the earthquake. The tsunami flooded the underground generators which cut off power to the coolant pumps which let the core temperature rise uncontrollably.
Every modern(ish) reactor is built to withstand the largest earthquake in known history occurring directly under it.
[QUOTE=booster;44517337]I love when environmentalists or whoever, keep saying they want other stuff instead of nuclear power that's just as efficient and gives out just as much power.
And then I ask "Like what?". Still haven't gotten an answer.
If only we had a working fusion generator, then all this would be trivial.[/QUOTE]
Well let's hope that the folk at ITER get their commercial reactor prototype running by 2027.
[QUOTE=Scar;44516865]Good.
Knee-Jerk reactions, like our governments' decision to switch over to "green" energy completely are just vote-grabs and not thought through.
I don't see the problem with nuclear energy anyway, every single argument about it is 'Think of Chernobyl!' or some deviation of that.[/QUOTE]
Well you also have groups like GreenPeace and PETA (for some reason) spreading misinformation about nuclear power.
I wish Australia would get onboard with Nuclear, glad to see Japan not backflip on it.
[QUOTE=MasterFen006;44516813]Yeah, why the hell not? It was an outdated plant that got hit with a tsunami [I]AND[/I] an earthquake at the same time (newer plants towards the epicentre were completely untouched), it's not indicative of the entire nuclear fleet.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=MasterFen006;44517450]Fukushima was the only plant affected by the earthquake, and that was only because it was outdated and it was also hit by a tsunami straight after.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Snowmew;44517472]Every modern(ish) reactor is built to withstand the largest earthquake in known history occurring directly under it.[/QUOTE]
While I agree with you that nuclear power should continued to be used, that's a flawed and naive argument.
However [I]obviously[/I] outdated and flawed the plant may have been, they still weren't able to stop this accident. It happned. And it's happened before. And it will happen again.
[QUOTE=Grimezy15;44517491]I wish Australia would get onboard with Nuclear, glad to see Japan not backflip on it.[/QUOTE]
yeah, you guys should try to get off coal ASAP
GODZILLA is coming...
There are already a lot of places here in Japan that use solar panels now, but this is good. I just hope that nothing bad like the disaster happens again, especially since the nearest nuclear power plant to where I live is 40km away.
[QUOTE=CyberHawk;44517511]While I agree with you that nuclear power should continued to be used, that's a flawed and naive argument.
However [I]obviously[/I] outdated and flawed the plant may have been, they still weren't able to stop this accident. It happned. And it's happened before. And it will happen again.[/QUOTE]
That's when "ban non-regulatory nuclear reactors" comes into play.
Of course banning them should be immediately followed by rebuilding them as a proper nuclear power plant.
I like how even in Finland they've used Fukushima as an argument against nuclear power. Finland literally has the oldest and most stable bedrock in the world, like how fucking stupid do you have to get.
[QUOTE=nVidia;44518339]I like how even in Finland they've used Fukushima as an argument against nuclear power. Finland literally has the oldest and most stable bedrock in the world, like how fucking stupid do you have to get.[/QUOTE]
That's what I love about Estonia. We're literally the safest place to be in case of natural disasters. Nothing ever happens here. Then again... that means the landscape is about as interesting as a bag of dead dicks. Granted, we have beautiful places, but goddamn, you haven't lived until you've seen Thailand...
[QUOTE=nVidia;44518339]I like how even in Finland they've used Fukushima as an argument against nuclear power. Finland literally has the oldest and most stable bedrock in the world, like how fucking stupid do you have to get.[/QUOTE]
It's known as ignorance and fearmongering
Of course they're going to use nuclear power. They don't have much choice. They're a densely populated island with not much resources. Importing a few lumps of uranium would be the logical choice as opposed to constantly importing millions and billions of tons of fossil fuels.
And TEPCO is going to be on a leash shorter than the Atomic Energy Commission's reach to bitchslap them at the slightest sign of sass or disregarding safety regulations, yes?
If not, you've learned nothing, Japan.
good.
[QUOTE=Scar;44516865]Good.
Knee-Jerk reactions, like our governments' decision to switch over to "green" energy completely are just vote-grabs and not thought through.
I don't see the problem with nuclear energy anyway, every single argument about it is 'Think of Chernobyl!' or some deviation of that.[/QUOTE]
The fearmongering concerning nuclear power plants in Switzerland is just as bad. The federal council literally went "WE'LL SHUT THEM DOWN IMMEDIATELY NOW" after Fukushima happened. Some days later they realized that replacing their large energy output with another environmentally friendly method isn't as easy as it sounds.
I also feel that people over here don't seem to trust anything. I mean, it's okay to criticize a subject, but no matter what arguments you bring up that speaks for nuclear power, most people I talked to just put it down as evil lies made up by the evil corporations so that they can get their money, make people's lives as miserable as possible and destroy the planet. The baseless fear can go to ridiculous extents.
Somebody bought a calculator it would seem.
"so if this percentage of our power generation comes from nuclear...and we subtract that from the total...and then add the cost of purchasing power from other sources...add in loss due to transmission inefficiency...annnnnndd that equaaals....a sum that requires we convert an entire generation into prostitutes. Shit."
If they were built and maintained correctly there wouldn't be any problems. I'm sure that if you brought the engineers to the finished worksite, they would have a heart attack at the number of corners being cut.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.