NYT: Japan Scraps Plan for New Nuclear Plants -- OUR TURN NEXT!!!

[Generic Other]

TOKYO — Prime Minister Naoto Kan said Tuesday that Japan would abandon plans to build new nuclear reactors, saying his country needed to “start from scratch” in creating a new energy policy.

Mr. Kan’s announcement came as Japan allowed residents of evacuated areas around the stricken Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant to briefly revisit their homes for the first time since the devastating earthquake and tsunami in March caused the nuclear accident.

Tuesday’s decision will abandon a plan that the Kan government released last year to build 14 more nuclear reactors by 2030 and increase the share of nuclear power in Japan’s electricity supply to 50 percent. Japan currently has 54 reactors that before the earthquake produced 30 percent of its electricity.

The cancellation of the planned nuclear plants is the second time that Mr. Kan has suddenly announced big changes in Japanese nuclear policy without the usual endless committee meetings and media leaks that characterize the country’s consensus-driven decision making. Mr. Kan appears to be seeking a stronger leadership role after criticism of his government’s sometimes slow and indecisive handling of the Fukushima accident.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/11/world/asia/11japan.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss&src=ig

[TheWraith]

1. YAY for more planet-killing coal power!

After all, it's not like smog from coal kills more people in one month in the US than civilian nuclear power has killed in the entire history of the world...

Oh wait. It's EXACTLY like that.

Well, it's not like coal plants in the US release over 2,000 tons of radioactive uranium and thorium directly into the air, every single year, levels of radiation that would get a nuclear plant shut down by the NRC...

Oh wait. It's EXACTLY like that.

Well, it's not like coal poisons towns and the areas around them, rendering large parts of the landscape uninhabitable for decades.

Oh wait. It's EXACTLY like that.

[Generic Other]

3. In my state we are getting rid of coal in favor of wind and water

The choice is not accept the potential poisons that comes with nukes or you have to use coal. That is a scare tactic. There are plenty of new technologies we can afford to invest in. Our lives and health are worth it.

[TheWraith]

7. And yet in most places, whenever you shut down nuclear, it's being replaced by coal.

Not to mention, most of the new power generation being built is coal.

[MadHound]

4. But it doesn't have to be an either/or choice,

You are, conveniently, forgetting that wind, water and solar can fulfill our energy needs.

[TheWraith]

6. As long as we're willing to wait 150 more years or so for them to catch up.

And in the meantime, keep utterly killing the planet with coal.

[Generic Other]

8. Instead we are willing to wait twenty years to see if we get cancer

from the nukes. Fuck that. Fast track new sources of energy. Building new wind farms does not take longer than building ne nuke plants. Using water efficiently does not take longer than it takes to die a hideous death from effects of radiation. Pure bunk.

[fascisthunter]

9. nuclear waste and fallouts are much more dangerous

using this as a way to defend nukes is well, reaching.

[peace4ever]

10. false equivalency strawman

fyi

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. They know the crisis is far from over

that's one of the reasons

[Bonobo]

5. Good for Kan and good for Japan. Now THAT is brave. nt