Print 84 comment(s) - last by athfbum.. on Aug 15 at 2:08 PM

The world's largest nuclear power plant demonstrates inherent safety

Those opposed to nuclear power have long raised doubts over its safety.  Often raised is the question, "what would happen if major earthquake struck one?"  Would a radioactivity release endanger millions?  

This morning, we got a chance to find out. A 6.8 earthquake struck northern Japan, almost directly underneath the massive Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Plant, responsible for a third of the Japanese residential electricity supply. The quake leveled hundreds of homes, left fissures 3 feet wide in the ground, and swayed buildings in Tokyo, 300 km away.

What happened at the plant itself? An electrical transformer caught fire and was quickly extinguished. And a tiny amount of mildly radioactive water was released -- one billionth of the safe amount allowed under under Japanese law, or 1/1,000,000 of what is generated from a single dental x-ray. Not even the workers actually inside the reactor were exposed to a dangerous dose, much less the general public. All reactors were shut down for inspection purposes, and initial reports indicate no damage or safety issues. 

And that's it.  Nothing to see here folks, move along.

The western world's nuclear safety record remains unbroken. Over five decades and thousands of reactor-years later, not one person has ever been harmed by commercial power generation. Nuclear power generates no greenhouse gases, and operating costs continue to drop, reaching a level of 1.66 cents per kilowatt-hour in 2006 -- one twentieth the cost of solar power. Despite all this, the U.S. and most of Europe continue to shy away from nuclear power, and pursue pie-in-the-sky energy approaches that, even if they eventually become feasible, will remain forever more expensive to operate.

The West may be ignoring nuclear power, but others are not. Last year, China announced plans to build 30 new reactors, in a bid to reduce air pollution and provide cheap power for its burgeoning economy.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By kenji4life on 7/16/2007 6:12:27 PM , Rating: 2
or 1/10,00,000 of what is generated from a single dental x-ray.

Maybe you're using a non-us-standard numeric comma system,
but this number looks funny.

Did you mean 1,000,000?

RE: commas
By TomZ on 7/16/2007 6:18:04 PM , Rating: 1
What they meant to say was "zero." But people might not believe you if you said your nuclear power plant only leaked plain water after an earthquake. The 1/(some big number) makes it sound more believable.

RE: commas
By masher2 on 7/16/2007 6:28:36 PM , Rating: 2
The information I got from Tokyo Electric was that 1 picoSievert was the approximate size of the release. I converted that into mrems for comparison purposes against a dental x-ray.

RE: commas
By emboss on 7/17/2007 7:49:14 AM , Rating: 2
How are they measuring the release size in Sieverts? A far more useful (and standard) number would be the leak size in Bq.

"Spreading the rumors, it's very easy because the people who write about Apple want that story, and you can claim its credible because you spoke to someone at Apple." -- Investment guru Jim Cramer
Related Articles
Nuclear Power Sets New Record
February 28, 2007, 6:39 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki