Nuclear power per se as an engineering problem is not that bad. The GE or GE Hitachi MK I plants have design flaws and really should be retired, not given a 20 year extensions. There are newer pebble-bed designs that uses air for coolant and not pressurized water, therefore even if the power gets knocked out, all you will be doing is venting hot air into the athmosphere. You do need a scrubber system to make sure that no radionuclides gets into the environment, but that's a feasible and easy engineering solution.
There are 2 problems with the nuclear industry as I see it. One is technical and the other is the human interface.
Technical: The problem is disposal of nuclear waste. Where are you going to place waste that have half-lives of thousands of yrs and you don't want to leach into the atmosphere? You got Yucca flats here in the U.S but that has been shot down already and there's no feasible politcal alternative at the moment. I suppose you can place it on the moon, but then there's the Space 1999 scenario. I suppose we can convert it into fuel for solar missions or even interstellar missions.
The human interface: TEPCO and indeed, the entire nuclear industry in Japan has a shoddy safety history. C'mon mixing spent fuel in steel buckets? Safety is a matter of attitude. Everyone has to buy into it, from management to the workers. It's not something you slack off..ever. I can name you one organization that has zero...zero nuclear incidents since it started operating reactors in the mid-50's. The U.S Navy. Why? Because Hyman Rickover made safety his first priority when he started the nuclear reactor project. He institionialized the mind-set that you never skimp on it, and you always keep your eye on it. and he hand picked the officers that were going to command those vessels and signed off personally (by being officer in charge during sea trials) on every nuclear vessel constructed during his tenure. If every utility has that type of attitude, I would sign off on nuclear power.
__________________
Into terror!, Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell
There are 2 problems with the nuclear industry as I see it. One is technical and the other is the human interface.
Technical: The problem is disposal of nuclear waste. Where are you going to place waste that have half-lives of thousands of yrs and you don't want to leach into the atmosphere? You got Yucca flats here in the U.S but that has been shot down already and there's no feasible politcal alternative at the moment. I suppose you can place it on the moon, but then there's the Space 1999 scenario. I suppose we can convert it into fuel for solar missions or even interstellar missions.
The human interface: TEPCO and indeed, the entire nuclear industry in Japan has a shoddy safety history. C'mon mixing spent fuel in steel buckets? Safety is a matter of attitude. Everyone has to buy into it, from management to the workers. It's not something you slack off..ever. I can name you one organization that has zero...zero nuclear incidents since it started operating reactors in the mid-50's. The U.S Navy. Why? Because Hyman Rickover made safety his first priority when he started the nuclear reactor project. He institionialized the mind-set that you never skimp on it, and you always keep your eye on it. and he hand picked the officers that were going to command those vessels and signed off personally (by being officer in charge during sea trials) on every nuclear vessel constructed during his tenure. If every utility has that type of attitude, I would sign off on nuclear power.
__________________
Into terror!, Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell