what bugs me is the possibility that one disaster, however unlikely, when it happens may render a wider area uninhabitable for a longer period of time. is this not the case?
and then, perhaps a bigger issue, waste management. just look at Germany [1], supposedly a role model country. please note that the New Scientist text is mostly about light waste, "just" 1000 years storage time. there's a committee trying to plan storage of highly radioactive waste - for 1 million years! we are a species of idiots. none of the plants generating that waste is going to give us a million years of power.
as others have mentioned, Fukushima could have been prevented. and Japan has also had accidents and cover-ups before [2]. all in all, it seems too risky.
and finally, what happened to Thorium plants? aren't they much much safer? or the breeder reactors, how are those coming along?
and then, perhaps a bigger issue, waste management. just look at Germany [1], supposedly a role model country. please note that the New Scientist text is mostly about light waste, "just" 1000 years storage time. there's a committee trying to plan storage of highly radioactive waste - for 1 million years! we are a species of idiots. none of the plants generating that waste is going to give us a million years of power.
as others have mentioned, Fukushima could have been prevented. and Japan has also had accidents and cover-ups before [2]. all in all, it seems too risky.
and finally, what happened to Thorium plants? aren't they much much safer? or the breeder reactors, how are those coming along?
[1] https://www.newscientist.com/article/2075615-radioactive-was... [2] https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20263-japans-record-o...