There has been a lot of attention given to nuclear power given Fukushima. I don’t know what the real story is, but there are alternative viewpoints to consider. For illustration, here are a few links suggesting difficulties in measurement and comparison of options, and the possible sensationalisation of the current crisis.

1) Several articles have been critical of the reporting. There is one at:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10713939

2) Some have been concerned at misinformation. For some details on the nuclear issue, see this by Josef Oehman of MIT:

http://www.businessinsider.com/japan-reactors-pose-no-risk-2011-3

3) Here is a piece from the (UK) Guardian by someone saying how the incident has changed his view of nuclear power: http://www.monbiot.com/2011/03/21/going-critical/

4) This is an article from Scientific American mentioned in (3) which compares radiation from nuclear reactors and from coal-fired power plants:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste

The title as given in the URL is misleading. The key point is made in the sentence, “In fact, the fly ash emitted by a power plant—a by-product from burning coal for electricity—carries into the surrounding environment 100 times more radiation than a nuclear power plant producing the same amount of energy.”

Advertisements