Also a major consideration for nuclear power in a country like Japan is population density and land area. They can't really afford to lose an area the size of the one that has been rendered uninhabitable by Chernobyl.

I am still for nuclear power but as Rath said, you just have to be smart with the placement of them and hope there isn't a serious natural disaster of that scale.

I am still for nuclear power. I can't belive we do not have more with all the compliants of fossil fuels. As far as I know there have bee no fatalities in the US from nuclear power. I know it produces waste, but that waste is contained and stored instead of spread around the worl like fossil fuels. I hope what happens in Japan doesn't put more fear into people about it.

I was under the impression the reactor was fairly old and new ones are alot safer, also nuclear power burns clean and can get us more energy then other things, also I heard on the news once that they sell left over isotopes to hospitals for treatment of cancer and stuff so yeah I'm definately for as long as all the required steps are taken to make it clean and safe (including earthquake proofing)

Agreed, truthfully Nuclear energy is "greener" then solar and wind mostly due to their raw constant power that do not need batteries to store for the times when you need power for when the wind and sun aren't out. But there are molten salt stations that can make solar green.

Yep.

When all things are accounted for, it's actually one of the safest forms of power... it's just, it shouldn't really be built in areas where there are massive disasters that happen without warning.

Well their should be backup generators then. From the news reports I saw it said that both the main pump and the back up pump had been damaged and were not working. This is the first I have heard that the generators were all that wen't down. If that were the case wouldn't the pumps be able to cool the reactor as soon as they were turned back on?

The situation has to be very serious considering the staff were evacuated, some returned for a so called suicide mission. But if the plants workers are leaving and helicopters are beeing called in to dump water on the reactors and fire trucks are doing likewise. It really doesn't sound like the situation is under control or as bad as the american situation.

Also sure you can't close plants over night, but the Japanese Government knew that this plant was to old. Newer plants were built to sustain earthquakes. The Government knowing this facility was out of date and a threat to the public should have closed it. Sure electricity might have been more scarse but look at the situation now, was it really worth this possible meltdown?

Personally I am for Nuclear power, as long as their are enough fail safes and safety measures in place to protect the populous. In the case of Japan, their were not enough fail safes and the facility was known to be too old. If I were in Japan or any other country with a known plant that isn't up to date and code. Yes I'd be against Nuclear Power in those cases.

I once thought the fission reactors would be good as bridge technology until we have the money, time and ressources for real green energy like water, sun and wind power, but since I learned of the HUGE costs of keeping the radioactive material safe and keeping the wasted deep under the earth, I decided for my self that I don't want nuclear power.

I know that the reactors in the developed countries are safe, but still we shouldn't advance further in that direction. Also Tschernobyl showed that you don't need an earthquake to have a maximum credible accident.  Keep the running reactor for now, but don't build new ones. That's my opinion.

The future are Fusion reactors anyway. :D

I have no issues with Nuclear power. It's cheap, clean fuel whilst its running, and it provides a hell of a lot of energy from one site.

Small issues like Chernobyl and Japan happen very rarely, and as can be seen in Japan, safety measures are there to protect it...

I hope Nuclear power continues to grow, it's the best way of supplying energy ATM, until Wind and Hydro methods can provide sustainable energy for the masses, at least

My opinion is the same as it was before and after Chernobyl, before and after Fukushima:  No, thanks.

Chernobyl and Fukushima were/are not "small issues" as Conegamer thinks and I'm afraid that - even in the unlikely case that another nuclear power plant catastrophe won't ever happen again - the thousands of tons of radioactive waste which are buried around the world will cause more problems in the future than anyone can imagine now.