RE: Why nuclear power still matters
Whilst I sympathise with the view that waste is a signifcant problem, people dying as a result of nuclear accidents must be of greater concern.
If Thorium reactors are so much safer, how come none of them are proposed for new nuclear build in the UK and around the world? For that matter how come energy comapnies aren't proposing building a larger number of smaller safer PWR reactors? Economics are ruling over common sense.
If we build nukes we are trying to control a reaction which, if left alone, has catastrophic and unpredicatable consequences. It is this unpredicatbility which makes it virtually impossible to design cost effective safety systems. Almost unique in human endeavour, the feedback after a nuclear accident is all negative. At least with the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico we knew what the worst case was. Don't say it can't happen.
Responsible sources, which use data based upon previous health patterns and reported illnesses, not on safe dose rates (which are under question) say that 200,000 people have died in Russia, Ukraine and Belarus as a result of Chernobyl. If you want a copy of a press release "What Chernobyl stands for, please contact me via the Communities Against Nuclear Expansion Facebook site.
