Comments on: Nuke plants needed but significant safety worries abound

By: Nuclear power now and 10 years hence | 世論 What Japan Thinks

Nuclear power now and 10 years hence | 世論 What Japan Thinks — Thu, 04 Aug 2011 15:32:04 +0000

[...] previously reported on a similar survey by the same company into nuclear power in Kansai, which may serve as a useful [...]

By: Nuclear power generation worries in Japan | 世論 What Japan Thinks

Tue, 01 Dec 2009 03:53:20 +0000

[...] looked in October at nuclear power in the Kinki region, today the topic is also nuclear power, but with a sample from all over the country, in a survey [...]

By: Bunny

Bunny — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 13:49:56 +0000

>Chris
I see what you mean, but I’m a little skeptical about the “pro-nuclear power and anti-nuclear weapon” stance that seems to be spreading as a “reasonable” stance for countries to take.

Why do so many countries want to invest in something that has such high economic/environmental costs and risks of disasters as nuclear power? Electricity is vital and all, but does it make sense to get electricity in exchange for a) radioactive waste that we can’t really deal with and b) the possibility of deaths and illnesses in case of accident (the latter concern should be especially big for Japan, the land of earthquakes)?

It’s not as if there isn’t any other way to meet our electricity demand. Nuclear power isn’t clean, and it isn’t cheap, either. So why nuke, really?

It doesn’t seem to make sense unless there is something else. What can that something be? Perhaps…keeping plutonium at hand, just in case…? Even if you don’t have nuclear weapons, you might want to keep the materials for them…just in case?

By: Chris

Chris — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 03:28:56 +0000

Why would you consider being anti-nuclear weapon but pro-nuclear power a dichotomy?

The purpose of one is to murder a huge number of people, the purpose of the other is to generate energy. Doesn’t seem unusual to support one but not the other.