Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

joshcryer

(62,536 posts)
17. That article is written by Elaine Hirsch.
Sun Feb 5, 2012, 04:52 AM
Feb 2012

The population of Fukushima Prefecture is 2 million. Therefore there was a 2 in 1 chance that a Fukushima Prefecture resident would be affected by a nuclear incident every year.

This is why Gen II/III/III+ nuclear reactors are not viable, as they have too low of a probability assessment. Far too low. The author even talks about "small probabilities" which the Fukushima reactors, archaic technology, were depending on.

Lower chance than being killed by lightening. There are 24k deaths by lightening every year. By that measure nuclear power should be blowing up every day. It's horribly low. You need levels so high as to be so improbable as the planet exploding or something like that.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Black Swan Theory and ant...»Reply #17