Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Fukushima: It's much worse than you think

english.aljazeera.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 112 posts

Re: Fukushima: It's much worse than you think

#11

Post by codeup »

nobody_nowhere wrote: post #3

The quick onslaught of the "it couldn't possibly be a meltdown" message in the mainstream media and the "MIT professor says" emails/webpages, etc all smacked of a propaganda campaign to me. All the while the fuel rods were sitting in a puddle at the bottom of the reactor... and probably leaking through into the ground. Of course, it's more likely that it was a lot of people not willing to believe the scope of the cat…

The first reactions to Fukushima on HN and the downvotes of your inconvenient comment show the massive pro-nuclear bias of many users here.

Re: Fukushima: It's much worse than you think

#12

Post by Duff »

dreamux wrote: post #5

"Most of the reactors in Japan were designed by US companies who did not care for the effects of earthquakes," As an Engineer I call bullshit on this.

Around the time of the disaster there were stories about a GE engineer who resigned in protest in 1970 over this particular model of reactor.

If I recall correctly, the engineering team's concerns about fail-safes in the event of a loss of electrical power were overruled or dismissed.

Re: Fukushima: It's much worse than you think

#13

Post by burgerbrain »

Duff wrote: post #8
nobody_nowhere wrote: post #3

The quick onslaught of the "it couldn't possibly be a meltdown" message in the mainstream media and the "MIT professor says" emails/webpages, etc all smacked of a propaganda campaign to me. All the while the fuel rods were sitting in a puddle at the bottom of the reactor... and probably leaking through into the ground. Of course, it's more likely that it was a lot of people not willing to believe the scope of the cat…

I was shocked at the immediate "this is not a problem" reaction by many people -- particularly here at Hacker News.

Just think of it as a natural counterweight to all the people who equate meltdown with a nuclear explosion.

Re: Fukushima: It's much worse than you think

#15

Post by nandemo »

Spyro7 wrote: post #7

"In the US, physician Janette Sherman MD and epidemiologist Joseph Mangano published an essay shedding light on a 35 per cent spike in infant mortality in northwest cities that occurred after the Fukushima meltdown, and may well be the result of fallout from the stricken nuclear plant." Somehow, I'm not surprised by this. Janette Sherman is an anti-nuclear activist: http://janettesherman.com/ Joseph Mangano is the di…

If Fukushima caused a 35% spike in infant mortality in the US, you gotta wonder what was the effect in Japan. Did they bother to check?

Re: Fukushima: It's much worse than you think

#16

Post by berntb »

In addition to the other criticism.

From the article: TEPCO announced that the accident probably released more radioactive material into the environment than Chernobyl, making it the worst nuclear accident on record.

Is there a reference supporting this? I've only seen values for Fukushima radiation as a fraction of Chernobyl (and if I remember correctly, not as bad isotopes)?

A while ago, I got multiple comments modded to -10, for questioning the trustworthiness of Al Jazeera. The web site is not connected to the tv channel?

(For the record: I don't really know about al J. I distrust most media, except NY Times/Washington Post/BBC as long as they don't write about advertisers.)

Re: Fukushima: It's much worse than you think

#17

Post by mattdeboard »

Shenglong wrote: post #14

One disaster, and people forget the half century of prosperity that nuclear power brought. Worse, the general public is going to see Fusion (fingers crossed) in the same way as fission just because it's also "nuclear power". I'm disheartened.

Uh, yeah, I mean, these are human being we're talking about. We can't even get people to accept evolutionary theory. I won't hold my breath waiting for people to be even-handed and partake in critical thought about the vagaries of nuclear power.

Re: Fukushima: It's much worse than you think

#18

Post by nl »

I'm not a big fan of the automatic approval many on HN give to nuclear power, and I agree that we haven't heard the last of Fukushima.

But this article is bullshit. There is no conceivable mechanism for it to have occurred, and no pattern in other cases of nuclear exposure.

Re: Fukushima: It's much worse than you think

#20

Post by [deleted] »

klenwell wrote: post #10

"In the US, physician Janette Sherman MD and epidemiologist Joseph Mangano published an essay shedding light on a 35 per cent spike in infant mortality in northwest cities that occurred after the Fukushima meltdown, and may well be the result of fallout from the stricken nuclear plant." "The eight cities included in the report are San Jose, Berkeley, San Francisco, Sacramento, Santa Cruz, Portland, Seattle, and Boise…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN