Well, given the situation happening in Japan, I am curious as to people's attitude towards nuclear power (and knowledge as well) and their stance towards building more reactors as the alternative energy of the future. Personally, I am in support of nuclear power (I'm actually studying reactor operation right now) and believe the reactor problem in Japan can be contained without a major effect on the surrounding people and environment. The reports are saying the situation is worse than Three Mile Island but that case wasn't as bad as people thought it was in the first place so I'm fairly optimistic. Definitely no Chernobyl (that was a clusterfuck).

So, what's your opinion?

Edit-The earthquake and tsunami has killed thousands in Japan but the nuclear incident, I believe, has not killed anyone yet. That radiation that's spreading is not yet a major health risk. When the news reports say that the radiation is 800 times than normal, that doesn't mean as much as you think it means since normal radiation is extremely low.

Probably should be avoided on the Ring of Fire, as the Japan situation has shown that Earthquakes cause problems. In east America, Europe and Africa it's a good idea though.

When people question health/environmental concerns of nuclear, I often look at the amount of damage to health caused by pollution from fossil fuels, or damage to the environment from oil spills, etc.

Well, the reactor problem is just one of many problems caused by the earthquake, which, as I said, am optimistic that it can be contained. If it is as bad as TMI, then it can definitely be resolved without major consequences. They can definitely build more earthquake-resistant reactors but honestly, how can anyone see a 9.0 earthquake coming?

Molten salt thorium breeder reactors are the energy source of the future ... Inexpensive nuclear energy with far less radioactive waste from a system that is practically impossible to have problems that would result in a melt down.

Well they happen once every 20 years or so.

There's been maybe 30 or so major earthquakes in the last 200 years that has pretty much struck everywhere in the world and has killed hundreds of thousands of people (where nuclear power wasn't even a concern). Hell, this is maybe the first time a nuclear incident has occur as a result of the earthquakes. Even with its risks, nuclear power has been a major benefit in Japan (as they don't have much resources).

To be honest I am wondering why their aren't more fail safes in place. The news report said their was a back up pump that failed. Why is their only one back-up pump? Another thought, why isn't the reactor and containment facility not built over water? Say you build it above a massive pool. That way if anything goes wrong, submerge the reactor in the pool and their yah go.

As for Nuclear power in many cases its nescessary. Where else is Japan going to get the electricity it needs? Wind turbines could provide some power but not enough to power the country. Their is very little options outside of nuclear. However British Columbia Canada where I live we have wind turbines, solar power, dams and all of those sources provide enough power to run the province and we actually export power.

But could wind turbines and solar panels do enough to power Japan? No I don't think so. Infact could they power the United States? Probably not even with the dams in place.

So I think Nuclear power is a nescassary evil. I think Japan should have closed the Fukushima plant awhile ago. I watched on the news that some of the reactors had already been shut down as they were so old. When your reactors are old like that and the plant is inefficiant you close the thing down.

Uh, well you need power to run the pumps. The earthquake/tsunami knocked out the diesel generators. No power, no...well, nothing. That brings up the fact that the pumps are there to circulate water through the fuel cell assemblies, which is enclosed in a shield tank. It's going to be pretty hard to move the reactor vessel and submerged it into the tank which I can't comprehend how that would work as you need to circulate the water through the vessel for effective heat transfer removal. Fuel matrix temperature can go up to 2000 F (and even higher than that). Plus, you would also let fission products into that pool (that's assuming you exposed the core to the water, and that's going to be a lot of radiation released).

Yes, the plant was to be shut down but closing plants don't happen overnight. You have to balance everything, including electricity demand, safety, storage, other logistics, etc...