The problem in Pripyat is mostly from the bio-accumulation in there, and the medium-half-life isotopes like Cs-137. The grass and moss is still not something you'd want to walk over barefoot. However, nature is dealing with it by doing this — plant growth there is actually helping to handle the radioisotopes just by being there.
Everything I've heard about the Fukushima plant is that the release is very small, and only really impacts the surrounding area to any significant degree. I do not understand why people in Hawaii, the US, and the freaking Netherlands are buying up tons of KI supplements and such. They're more likely to kill themselves from iodine overdose than to ever encounter radioactive iodine in the next month.
Sakamoto demands an explanation for this shit.Nah, the radiation from that disperses too quickly and there's really only a smoldering pile in the middle of the desert right now, surrounded by fence.
So basically, not all that dangerous aside from the initial impact.
The thing about making witty signature lines is that it first needs to actually be witty.Yeah, they do. Unfortunately, when the average American hears the words "nuclear power," his thought process goes something like this:
Nuclear power = Three Mile Island = Chernobyl = Nuclear explosion = Death.
At this point he proceeds to flip the fuck out and sends an angry email to his congressman, his local newspaper, or the pundit of his choice.
There's something to be said for the astronomical costs of a meltdown, though. It's not enough to repeat, "This could never happen again. Oh, and that could never happen." Obviously, the exact same circumstances won't occur a second time. Each major meltdown has occurred due to a new, unforeseen problem.
Maybe some of us just aren't buying into the idea of a fail-safe nuclear plant.
I'm a skeptical squirrelAs a note, no power source — none, whatsoever — is immune to accidents. it'd be asking for an impossibility to expect such. However, there are modern designs in place that make the chance of accidents much, much lower than ever, and make the results of such accidents less dangerous. Pebble-bed reactors are a form that, if designed properly, are essentially immune to meltdown.
edited 18th Mar '11 9:08:24 PM by GoggleFox
Sakamoto demands an explanation for this shit.Nobody said failsafe, just Chrynoble safe. Which it is. Nuclear is better all around unless something is done incredibly wrong, or the fourth largest earthquake in history happens. The rewards far outweigh the benefits, ^we just need to get over the stigma of nuclear power.
Charlie Tunoku is a lover and a fighter.Fast breeder pebble beds are like my dream power plant.
Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.We can't, at least not now. Thus the "dream".
EDIT: For the record: data on Integrated Fast Reactors, aka Fast Breeder Reactors
.
And George Monbiot's position on atomic power, for anyone interested
. I think someone already linked that though.
edited 18th Mar '11 10:54:17 PM by RadicalTaoist
Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.

^ Don't people die when they are killed? Why aren't you dead?
On-topic about radiation from nuclear plants:
Does anyone actually realize how low a dosage you can expect from plant meltdowns like in Japan? Or worse fail to account for radioactive decay as if it were not a constant process?
For example most of Pripyat is actually inhabitable radiation wise by now. The high energy stuff that kills you has long since decayed heavily. You know the unstable isotopes whose half-lives are measured in minutes to hours and at most days?