I have never seen the nuclear industry address the question of why their safety analysis calculations are off by an order of magnitude. Until they do, and I think it should include a gigantic mia culpa, my own choice would be not to allow any of their fantastical designs to be built.
One nuclear industry safety assessment figure claims risks are only one-tenth as great as the historic record shows they are. If the people in the industry know it, they are not admitting to a serious safety problem. If they don’t know it, they are simply ignorant of their industry’s record. Either way, I think it is clear that nuclear industry safety analyses should be regarded as untrustworthy.
A new study has revolutionised our understanding of the likelihood of nuclear accidents such as the core meltdowns in Chernobyl and Fukushima, suggesting that these catastrophic accidents are likely to happen every 10 to 20 years, some 200 times more than had been estimated previously. The researchers from the … [continued]
