Disclaimer: I still think fission power might be better in the long run than coal power (catastrophic global warming is worse than any nuclear disaster), but I'd rather do without either and strive for 100% renewable energies. It can be done, just needs the willingness to do it.
So I don't feel that is an entirely fair comparison.
What if such an event had hit, say, an Oil fired power station - you'd likely be looking at a reasonable level local oil contamination, and probably a large fire. I don't know how much more likely that such an event would be to happen but I am going to guess that safety and fail safes at fossil fuel stations are not quite the same as at a nuclear plant :)
(in terms of your last point; it totally can. But practically speaking it is something that has to start at home. Millions of people can afford solar panels on their home; but they mostly don't bother (and some moan about the lack of action...!). And we could be pressuring local government to introduce housing regs requiring new builds to have solar panels.)
Anyway, clearly a complicated issue, not trying to convince anyone here of anything.
Even my parents, who are not exactly the most well off people, can afford (and have bought) solar panels. It doesn't make them self sufficient - but if everyone in the town (that could) did it that is a massive impact!
We had a survey here recently - in the town of about 15,000 people only 48 had solar panels. The statistics from ONS for the area suggest that at least 20% of the residents could afford solar panels.
Just saying :P
No, it is not: http://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/withouthotair/c6/page_39....
Our systems account for about 2KW/h per person, per day. So that is about 30% of our own energy consumption.
15,000 ppl @ 6KW/h = 90,000 KW/h
3,000 ppl (20%) generating 2KW/h = 6,000 KW/h
That's 6% of the towns energy generation.
Which might not sound a lot, true. But on the other hand commercial renewable energy production in the UK accounts for about the same amount (8 ish percent I believe). So if everyone did it that would double renewable energy production.
I find that significant :)
I admit to "over egging" the ease, and being extremely optimistic in terms of the coverage and uptake of such a mass social movement :) but I still think it is something we all should try.
Renewable energy is entirely possible but it's a truly difficult problem, not just technologically but from a cost-benefit side as well.
Similarly, what would the consequences be if a chemical plant producing say pesticides were to undergo the same fate? Simply because a process may be dangerous doesn't mean that it can't be safely harnessed into the service of man.
The technology works incredibly well. And in Japan, the people are well trained and prepared, and I have every confidence that they'll be able to cool the reactors down without releasing much radiation into the environment, as long as nothing else goes wrong.
Now take that exact same reactor and build it in Iran, Bangladesh, Congo, Libya. Do you have the same confidence in it? Japan was a best-case scenario.
the result might be not positive enough regarding the possible long-term damage it still can have to the environment and the japanese people (35M in tokyo area alone).