# Nuclear meltdown! Holy Godzilla NOOOO!!! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 12, 2011, 8:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-meltdown-holy-godzilla-noooo/574389 "2011-03-12T08:19:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 61
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2011, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-meltdown-holy-godzilla-noooo/574389/1201 "2011-03-30T17:27:07Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > How many people have been killed in the US by nuclear power generation again? > > Pot, meet kettle. :rolleyes: I’m guilty of it too I’m sure, but it would be nice to keep the US and the world as separate issues when appropriate, and when not. You earlier cited a global (actually “member country”) study showing nuke is cheaper than everything but since the US has no recent experience building nuke plants and isn’t building any nuke plants it was all a complete guess and the study specifically stated that no one source of energy is the cheapest. Construction costs in the US are going up at something like 15% per year, and there are absolutely no nuclear plans being considered for the US that acknowledge that fact. They’ll tell you how much China can build a nuke plant for, and then consult their astrologist and then imply we could build a nuke plant in the US for less than $10-15 billion over 10-15 years. As an additional insult they’ll ignore long-term storage, waving it away as something that will magically solve itself looooong before it becomes a problem except now everyone knows that it’s a huge problem and no solution exists either in the US or Japan. None. Put \*that \*in your cost of nuke power pipe and smoke it! 😛 If you want the discussion to stay within the US, you can’t cite construction costs for nuke because we aren’t building any nukes. You can’t guess what it would cost at all. Ixnay on atthay. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2011, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-meltdown-holy-godzilla-noooo/574389/1202 "2011-03-30T17:28:21Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > How many people have been killed in the US by nuclear power generation again? How many people have been killed in the US by a tsunami again? Clearly tsunamis are safe. ---
**Author:** ![kidchameleon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/898d66/32.png) [@kidchameleon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kidchameleon)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2011, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-meltdown-holy-godzilla-noooo/574389/1203 "2011-03-30T17:59:38Z")
> [@levdrakon](#): > > Everyone who says we get radiation for the sun, outer space, the ground, bananas, and potatoes and radiation cures cancer is saying “radiation is safe.” What else could they be claiming? That there are various sources of radiation emitting different amounts at different energies in different ways? > [@](#): > > If saying “1,000 millisieverts, oh no!” is fear mongering than saying “you get radiation from bananas” is - what? A…fact. > [@](#): > > What’s the opposite of fear-mongering that way? Spreading ignorance? Yeah, that’s probably a good term for it. The fact that you think that using facts is spreading ignorance is telling. You really don’t seem to care about the reality of the situation as long as it fits your perception. ---
**Author:** ![kidchameleon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/898d66/32.png) [@kidchameleon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kidchameleon)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2011, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-meltdown-holy-godzilla-noooo/574389/1204 "2011-03-30T18:03:46Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > How many people have been killed in the US by a tsunami again? 106 in the [1964 Alaskan Tsunami](http://wcatwc.arh.noaa.gov/64quake.htm) alone. > [@](#): > > Clearly tsunamis are safe. Clearly you can’t even be bothered to do a Google search. ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2011, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-meltdown-holy-godzilla-noooo/574389/1205 "2011-03-30T18:08:52Z")
> [@kidchameleon](#): > > That there are various sources of radiation emitting different amounts at different energies in different ways? You think people hadn’t already learned that in grade school, or hadn’t been recently reminded of this fact in 100 different news articles illustrated with 100 different analogies? > [@](#): > > The fact that you think that using facts is spreading ignorance is telling. You really don’t seem to care about the reality of the situation as long as it fits your perception. As they say, you can prove anything with facts. Facts can show you how dangerous radiation is, and facts can show you how safe radiation is. Here is a fact for you: the news media wants you to read or listen to their news. They are going to say “new radiation found! Tune in to get the information you need, to keep your family safe!” Once you watch the program, and they get their advertising money, you’ll roll your eyes because it turns out they were talking about less radiation than you get from a plane ride. That’s how it works. Everyone should know this. How can you not? ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2011, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-meltdown-holy-godzilla-noooo/574389/1206 "2011-03-30T18:14:26Z")
Yeah, cause everytime you take a plane ride, you are eating and drinking Cesium from the Japanese plant. Maybe some plutonium as well. Why can’t people get this through their heads? ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2011, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-meltdown-holy-godzilla-noooo/574389/1207 "2011-03-30T18:20:39Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > Yeah, cause everytime you take a plane ride, you are eating and drinking Cesium from the Japanese plant. Maybe some plutonium as well. > > Why can’t people get this through their heads? Sometimes you make sense, and sometimes I really can’t tell what you’re on about. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2011, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-meltdown-holy-godzilla-noooo/574389/1208 "2011-03-30T18:23:50Z")
See the rant thread. Then it will all become clear. ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2011, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-meltdown-holy-godzilla-noooo/574389/1209 "2011-03-30T18:38:22Z")
> [@mhendo](#): > > What they could be saying is exactly what the [Union of Concerned Scientists](http://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear_power/nuclear_power_risk/safety/nuclear-crisis-japan-telepress-transcript-03-28-11.html) say, which is that: The point, in this case, is simply to note that the large newspaper headlines about clouds of radiation arriving here from Japan misrepresent the threat, because the among that gets here is so diffuse and diluted by distance and time that the _increase_ over our regular radiation exposure is so small as to constitute no immediate threat at all, and an almost-zero increase in long-term health risks. > > For me, what it means is that i recognize that on any day of my life i could receive some radiation that, down the line, leads to the formation of cancer. All it takes is a single “hit” that sets in motion the series of unnatural replications that lead to cancer. But that i don’t feel any measurable _increased_ risk of this happening simply as a result of the tiny amounts of fallout we are receiving from Japan. Could you condense that into a catchy five-word headline please? You’re on in 5 seconds. 4… 3… 2… live! Now! Pull in some readers or your’re fired! ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2011, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-meltdown-holy-godzilla-noooo/574389/1210 "2011-03-30T18:43:50Z")
Tornado rips through wind farm, massive air spill feared. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2011, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-meltdown-holy-godzilla-noooo/574389/1211 "2011-03-30T20:22:14Z")
[QUOTE=levdrakon] No see, what you’ll do is deny anything happened at Fukushima until you simply can’t deny it anymore. [/QUOTE] No, see this is YOUR strawman of me. The reality is that I’ll deny anything has happened until there is some sort of proof that it has…some sort of CREDIBLE proof that it has. I’m not going to go leaping off the cliff every time I hear some news source do the chicken-little dance. Me, I’m periodically checking the IAEA site, and basically going roughly on that, along with a few other places. You? Whatever sounds scariest at the time and that you think you can use to make whatever points you think you are making…or can use to deceive the largest number of people you THINK you are tricking. Whichever works best for you. Frankly, I don’t think it’s working out very well, except with the gonzomax/FXM crowd, but you go with what you think works for you best man. > [@](#): > > Trying to pin you down to one point is like wrestling a greased octopus. It’s easy to pin me down. Show me facts from credible sites. Simple as that. As when I was just dead wrong and stupid about the argument I was having with 'luci…when I’m wrong, I’ll happily admit it and acknowledge I’m wrong. Citing some scary sounding news report with no context that runs contrary to what I’m reading on the IAEA website though is not going to get me to acknowledge I’m wrong. You on the other hand have been shown to be wrong numerous times in this series of threads and I’ve yet to see you acknowledge it in any way…you simply move on to something else, and in a few cases then wait a few pages and bring up the same wrong bullshit again. I don’t know whether this is more of your deception tactic, or if you just refuse to learn or view your own cast in concrete preconceptions. Not that it matters which is the case, since the end result is the same. > [@](#): > > I’ve read a lot of articles about this over the last couple weeks and I can’t remember ever reading an article from a mainstream newsource that didn’t include, “authorities say this is not harmful,” or “no cause for alarm” or some such. Dude…do you know what the word ‘strawman’ MEANS?? Because you seem to use them all the time. I never said that there was no cause for alarm…never said that there is nothing harmful. Don’t think the authorities are saying that there is no cause for alarm or nothing harmful. What I’ve said is that you have to look realistically at what the actual dangers are, not go off half cocked on a chicken-little-esque rampage of fear and foam. Which is what you’ve been trying to do (though, to give you credit, a lot less than gonzomax and FXM, who are truly fear crazed AND stupid). > [@](#): > > You try to make it all about fear mongering when what you’re obviously trying to do is avoid any discussion of nuclear power that could in any way cast it in a negative light, which is kinda silly when all people have to do is turn on the TV. Because what you are saying IS ‘fear mongering’…of the first order. A clear assessment of what’s going on there is that it’s a serious problem akin to a major industrial accident or toxic waste spill, and that it’s taking considerable effort to prevent it from getting worse. And that it will take time and effort to clean up afterward. THAT is all reasonable, based on what’s known right now. Projecting that there will be a nuclear wasteland outside of the power plant for the next 1000 years, or that this is going to cause (some large scary number) of dim mak deaths in the future, or that it’s going to poison the oceans for (some large scary number of years and some large scary number of miles), or any of the other horseshit trying to be peddled in this thread is fear mongering at this point. [Here](http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/tsunamiupdate01.html)…here is the latest report from the IAEA (as of today) concerning the crisis: > [@](#): > > 1. Current Situation > > Overall at the Fukushima Daiichi plant, the situation remains very serious. > > With respect to the water that is present in the turbine buildings. In Unit 1, water has continued to be pumped into the condenser with 3 pumps (6.5 ton/hour each) and the water level has reduced from 40cm to 20cm. In Unit 2 from 07.45 UTC, pumping of water from the Condensate Storage Tank into the Surge Tank was started so that the that condenser can be drained to the Condensate Storage Tank and contaminated water can be pumped out from the Turbine building into the condenser. The same process of pumping the water from the Condensed Water Storage Tank into the Surge Tank was started on Unit 3 at 08.40 UTCon March 28. > > Near the Unit 3 building, 3 workers spilled water over themselves when removing a flange from seawater pipes on the residual heat removal system (RHR). After showering, contamination was not detected. > [@](#): > > 1. Radiation Monitoring > > The majority of the recently measured radioactivity levels in drinking water are being reported below the levels established by the Japanese authorities which are 100 Bq/L of I-131 for infants; 300 Bq/L for adults and 200 Bq/L of Cs-137 for infants and adults. Previously imposed recommendations for restrictions on drinking water are being lifted in most of the affected locations. As of 28 March, recommendations for restrictions based on I-131 concentration remain in place in one village in the Fukushima prefecture. In three other locations of the Fukushima prefectures, restrictions continue to apply for infants only. > > Two IAEA teams are currently monitoring radiation levels and radioactivity in the environment in Japan. On 29 March, one team made gamma dose-rate measurements in the Tokyo region at 8 locations. Gamma-dose rates measured ranged from 0.02 to 0.19 microsievert per hour, which is within or slightly above the background. > [@](#): > > As far as food contamination is concerned, 35 samples taken from 25-29 March, and reported on 29 March, for various vegetables, fruit (strawberry), seafood, pork and unprocessed raw milk in nine prefectures (Chiba, Gunma, Ibaraki, Kanagawa, Nagano, Niigata, Saitama, Tochigi and Yamagata), stated that results for iodine-131, caesium-134 and caesium-137 were either not detected or were below the regulation values set by the Japanese authorities. > [@](#): > > Local government officials briefed the FAO/IAEA Team on the extent of contamination in Tochigi, the principle agricultural products affected, the main production areas and production methods (greenhouses, open-air), levels of contamination found (principally in air, tap/ground water and vegetables) and imminent plans to monitor soil contamination. A field visit also took place to a spinach producer outside Utsanomiya City. > > Based on these latest discussions with the Tochigi authorities, it is apparent that the focus of the Joint FAO/IAEA mission has changed to some extent from the mechanisms of contamination to remediation strategies and techniques related to plant and animal production, food traceability and water/soil characterization. -XT ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2011, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-meltdown-holy-godzilla-noooo/574389/1212 "2011-03-30T20:26:39Z")
Has anyone mentioned the fire at the other plant, 7 miles down the coast? ---
**Author:** ![kidchameleon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/898d66/32.png) [@kidchameleon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kidchameleon)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2011, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-meltdown-holy-godzilla-noooo/574389/1213 "2011-03-30T20:34:15Z")
> [@levdrakon](#): > > Sometimes you make sense, and sometimes I really can’t tell what you’re on about. I think that’s an understatement of nuclear proportions. ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2011, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-meltdown-holy-godzilla-noooo/574389/1214 "2011-03-30T20:47:13Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > No, see this is YOUR strawman of me. The reality is that I’ll deny anything has happened until there is some sort of proof that it has…some sort of CREDIBLE proof that it has. I’m not going to go leaping off the cliff every time I hear some news source do the chicken-little dance. Me, I’m periodically checking the IAEA site, and basically going roughly on that, along with a few other places. Except it takes days of citing you the credible facts before you grudgingly acknowledge “maybe” then you start yelling about straw men again. You love that word. > [@](#): > > You? Whatever sounds scariest at the time and that you think you can use to make whatever points you think you are making…or can use to deceive the largest number of people you THINK you are tricking. Whichever works best for you. Frankly, I don’t think it’s working out very well, except with the gonzomax/FXM crowd, but you go with what you think works for you best man. Whatever sounds scariest? Like what? Forbidden words like radiation and reactors and uranium? I realize you’d like to censor those words right out but I’m not going to let you. If I let you have your way, everyone would think that nuke plant is actually a big tasty ginger bread house and it’s true, a banana fell off but it’s no cause for concern. Don’t fear monger! > [@](#): > > It’s easy to pin me down. Show me facts from credible sites. I do but you discard them, like when I told you about the situation with the farmers affected by the ginger bread house banana boo boo, and you kept insisting “10,000 people are dead, don’t you care???” blistering counter argument. > [@](#): > > Simple as that. As when I was just dead wrong and stupid about the argument I was having with 'luci…when I’m wrong, I’ll happily admit it and acknowledge I’m wrong. Citing some scary sounding news report with no context that runs contrary to what I’m reading on the IAEA website though is not going to get me to acknowledge I’m wrong. > > You on the other hand have been shown to be wrong numerous times in this series of threads and I’ve yet to see you acknowledge it in any way…you simply move on to something else, and in a few cases then wait a few pages and bring up the same wrong bullshit again. I don’t know whether this is more of your deception tactic, or if you just refuse to learn or view your own cast in concrete preconceptions. Not that it matters which is the case, since the end result is the same. Wrong about what? > [@](#): > > Dude…do you know what the word ‘strawman’ MEANS?? Because you seem to use them all the time. I never said that there was no cause for alarm…never said that there is nothing harmful. Don’t think the authorities are saying that there is no cause for alarm or nothing harmful. What I’ve said is that you have to look realistically at what the actual dangers are, not go off half cocked on a chicken-little-esque rampage of fear and foam. Which is what you’ve been trying to do (though, to give you credit, a lot less than gonzomax and FXM, who are truly fear crazed AND stupid). When I point out your inaccuracies, with cites, that is not a straw man. > [@](#): > > Because what you are saying IS ‘fear mongering’…of the first order. A clear assessment of what’s going on there is that it’s a serious problem akin to a major industrial accident or toxic waste spill, and that it’s taking considerable effort to prevent it from getting worse. And that it will take time and effort to clean up afterward. THAT is all reasonable, based on what’s known right now. Projecting that there will be a nuclear wasteland outside of the power plant for the next 1000 years, or that this is going to cause (some large scary number) of dim mak deaths in the future, or that it’s going to poison the oceans for (some large scary number of years and some large scary number of miles), or any of the other horseshit trying to be peddled in this thread is fear mongering at this point. > > [Here](http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/tsunamiupdate01.html)…here is the latest report from the IAEA (as of today) concerning the crisis: When have I claimed any of that? Take that up with whomever said that, not me. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2011, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-meltdown-holy-godzilla-noooo/574389/1215 "2011-03-30T21:12:08Z")
[QUOTE=levdrakon] Except it takes days of citing you the credible facts before you grudgingly acknowledge “maybe” then you start yelling about straw men again. You love that word. [/QUOTE] When you come up with credible sites I acknowledge it. Sadly, though, you haven’t come up with many to back up your positions. As for using the term ‘straw men’ a lot, I wouldn’t have to if you didn’t build so many. > [@](#): > > Whatever sounds scariest? Like what? Forbidden words like radiation and reactors and uranium? I realize you’d like to censor those words right out but I’m not going to let you. If I let you have your way, everyone would think that nuke plant is actually a big tasty ginger bread house and it’s true, a banana fell off but it’s no cause for concern. Don’t fear monger! Well, whatever you think you can use to deceive or obscure/muddy the waters with. Certainly if it sounds scarier then that’s a bonus for you. As for me, no…I don’t want to forbid any words. I just want to forbid the copious use of horseshit. Sadly I can’t, as shown by the fact that you are still posting it. As is FXM and The Gonz. > [@](#): > > I do but you discard them, like when I told you about the situation with the farmers affected by the ginger bread house banana boo boo, and you kept insisting “10,000 people are dead, don’t you care???” blistering counter argument. I actually didn’t weigh in on the great banana debate. I did point out that the the current death toll stands at 10-30k dead from the overall disaster, 0-3/8 (if we count the mystery deaths that are being covered up) for the ‘nuclear disaster’ part. 30k evacuated in the wake of detected radiation outside the plant…250k evacuated in the wake of the rest of the disaster. Some farmers who can’t sell their produce because of radiation contamination (which is dropping)…a lot of other people who have no businesses at all anymore because of earthquake and tsunami damage. Etc, etc. That you don’t get it…well, I’m not sure what that shows but it certainly means something… > [@](#): > > Wrong about what? Dude…you’ve been wrong so many times I can’t even count them anymore. And these threads have gone on so long that I’m not going to bother looking. If you think you’ve not been wrong in any of these threads then you are delusional…and if you have a cite that you acknowledged when you were wrong then feel free to post it, or even just describe the point and how you admitted you were wrong about it. > [@](#): > > When I point out your inaccuracies, with cites, that is not a straw man. Nope, it wouldn’t be…except that usually your cites don’t actually show my inaccuracies, but instead are either from non-credible or quasi-credible news sources, or they are deliberate attempts at deception. Mostly the latter in your case, as that seems to be your standard mode of ‘debate’. > [@](#): > > When have I claimed any of that? Take that up with whomever said that, not me. Possibly at the same time you say I claimed that nothing was going on at the power plant, that there was no crisis, that there was nothing to worry about, that I denied anything had happened, etc etc. It’s been a LONG series of threads, but the general theme I’ve gotten from you is what I said (obviously I took some liberties with exaggerations…for effect, mind. Plus I conflated your position with some others that you seem to support more than you dispute, so you get tarred with the same brush). Did you read the cite I linked too btw? Did you at least read the parts I quoted? Thoughts? -XT ---
**Author:** ![Nancarrow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/c37758/32.png) [@Nancarrow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nancarrow)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2011, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-meltdown-holy-godzilla-noooo/574389/1216 "2011-03-30T21:19:16Z")
> [@levdrakon](#): > > Trying to pin you down to one point is like wrestling a greased octopus. [Homer Simpson][Mmmm… greased octopus…](http://gospain.about.com/od/fooddrink/ss/topspanishfood_2.htm)[/HS] ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2011, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-meltdown-holy-godzilla-noooo/574389/1217 "2011-03-30T22:05:53Z")
Now I’m hungry. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Second\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@The\_Second\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Second_Stone)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2011, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-meltdown-holy-godzilla-noooo/574389/1218 "2011-03-31T17:39:32Z")
I’m irradiated. And bananas. Bring back irradiated banana cream pie. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2011, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-meltdown-holy-godzilla-noooo/574389/1219 "2011-03-31T21:01:30Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > I have cited here (or elsewhere…losing track but somewhere on this Board): > > - Nuclear is cheaper than all but coal > - ZERO people in the US have been killed as a result of nuclear power generation > > Whether it was this thread or other thread I am sure I have pointed this out to you. > > You refuse to listen to facts or argue the merits and prefer to cling to your overt biases. You claimed before you could provide a thousand cites to debunk the cost issue I raised in another thread. You have yet to provide one such cite (well, you did provide one but I showed it was so horribly biased and skewed and essentially worthless as to be ignored completely). Your cite was bogus. Nuclear is far more expensive. > **[Energy & Environment](https://gigaom.com/energy-environment/)** > > A123 Systems Alphabet Energy Amyris Battery Battery Ventures Biofuel Bloom Energy BP BrightSource Energy California Cleantech Open California Public Utilities Commission Cap Nuclear is also dangerous and they can not get insurance because of it. ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2011, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-meltdown-holy-godzilla-noooo/574389/1220 "2011-03-31T23:08:31Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > Your cite was bogus. Nuclear is far more expensive. > [Energy & Environment - Gigaom](http://gigaom.com/cleantech/nuclear-energy-more-expensive-than-some-clean-power-study-says/) > Nuclear is also dangerous and they can not get insurance because of it. Your cite contains an important factoid pro-nukers hate to acknowledge: > [@](#): > > In addition to assessing business risks for new nuclear power facilities, study author Craig Severance set out to clarify the notion that short-sighted, anti-nuclear environmentalists halted carbon-free energy development. High costs, he writes, have thwarted nuclear all along: > > Utility executives and Wall Street financiers were the ones who stopped nuclear power’s expansion in the 1970′s. As more evidence of the business risks and the costs associated with nuclear power became clear through utilities’ own experiences, utility boards across the country, and the financial houses who fund them, stopped considering nuclear power a serious future option. Orders for new plants that had already been advanced, were quietly withdrawn. The nuclear industry simply failed to compete against other available options, whose risks and costs were significantly lower. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-meltdown-holy-godzilla-noooo/574389.md?page=60) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-meltdown-holy-godzilla-noooo/574389.md?page=62)