General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: So it turns out that nadinbrzezinski was correct re Fukushima [View all]FBaggins
(26,721 posts)Good thing most others don't have that standard. Wouldn't you get lonely?
I and others are working on gathering data
You're "working on gathering data" are you? This because living next to a fault line also makes you a seismologist?
I've got news for you. You aren't gathering data... you're getting played. There are legitimate reasons for some people to oppose nuclear power, but the Caldicotts/Busbys/Gundersens of the world can't make enough money pitching just to the reasonable opponents. They will manufacture "expert" "reports" saying whatever you like... because that's how they make their living (selling to the irrationally fearful and then using that manufactured "evidence" to scare more innocent people in the hopes that they can convince them to chip in financially.
No doubt the data gaterng is to try to refute the recetly-released report that even a 10,000-year quake that crosses over to multiple faults in the area... doesn't endanger the plant.
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/PG-E-Diablo-Canyon-nuclear-plant-can-withstand-6131396.php
However that is not my main concern but the contamination with radiation of our fisheries and agricultural land.
You think that Diablo Canyon has done that? Hmmm... go ahead and try to shut them down (only to watch PG&E replace the generation with natural gas which actually HAS killed people (not long before Fukushima)