Hacker News Reader

Comment by Animats | Hacker News Reader

If plants were still being built to 1960s standards, we'd have many Fukushima type reactors that can't survive a loss of plant power. The US still has some of those, Peach Bottom, Pennsylvania being the best known.

There's a lot to be said for a big, strong containment vessel. That's why the Three Mile Island meltdown was an expensive accident but didn't injure anyone. Maybe if the industry just got better at big, strong containment vessels cheaply...

View on HN

Even at Fukushima one person died as a direct result of the accident.

Evacuation killed more people.

Tell us you don't know what short lived fission products and a very very lucky turn of wind are without telling us you don't know what short lived fission products and a very very lucky turn of wind are.

Tell us you don't know that even scientific community is in agreement about this (and Chernobyl) without telling you don't know

Yes the scientific community is absolutely in agreement with evacuation from the plume being unnecessary /s

Yes, the scientific community is in agreement about the overstated risk of these incidents.

That wasn't your statement. It's real weird how any pro nuclear argument always seems to be followed up by this exact same slimy deflection tactic and a never ending stream of lies.

This is my statement: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35383560

This applies to the whole fearmongering about nuclear energy with actual slimy tactics.

Implying that the evacuation was unnecessary.

Either you have no idea what short lived fission prpducts are or you're actively lying.

> Implying that the evacuation was unnecessary.

Implying that overall dangers spouted by fearmongers are overrated given the context of the discussion.

Again, the straw man you fell back to was not your initial statement.

Again, whatever you imagine I implied, said, or thought, has nothing to do with what I actually said or thought.

You said the evacuations were unnecessary and killed people. Leaving a burning building doesn't kill people even if some die in the attempt. You then backed up immediately with unrelated nonsense when challenged.

Veering away from the immediate dangers, almost the entirety of what was the Fukishima exclusion zone is now roughly 4x less radioactive than a flight from Japan to New York.

https://blog.japanwondertravel.com/fukushima-exclusion-zone-...

Which is a handy counter to claims of it being off limits for centuries.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com