Sadly it looks like one of their nukes was not as ‘earthquake proof’ as they thought. This could set the clean energy movement back decades. Unless some kid in a lab comes up with the super-battery, I’m not convinced wind and solar can do the job.
I guess burning energy of any sort involves risk. Burning coal has raised lung cancer rates in our beautiful wine growing Hunter Valley 3 times above cancer rates in Sydney because of all the uranium and thorium particles that are released. They might only be in small parts per million, but when each coal station burn tens or hundreds of millions of tons of coal each year, the radiation released soon adds up. And this is not to mention the GLOBAL risk of climate change.
So how do we measure risk? If you took each of the 400 or so reactors in the world and put their life-spans end to end, you would see the nuclear age being about 13 thousand reactor years. In that time we’ve had Chernobyl, which even anti-nuclear activist Professor Ian Lowe of the ACF admits was practically SABOTAGED by the mismanagement of the Soviets, we’ve had 3 Mile Island where hardly anything was released and no one died, and now this. 3 accidents over 12 to 13 thousand reactor years. Now that’s not bad. Do you know how many engineers die each year falling off wind turbines?
Do you know what would happen if the modern world did not have some form of cheap enough energy security?