Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> That appears to be an accident handling the output of an isotope manufacturing reactor, not anything involving a power reactor.

That is irrelevant to my point, which is that the biggest risk to reactor safety with current fission tech is human error and negligence.

> compare almost any form of mining

The only form of mining comparable in terms of potential environmental damage is ocean oil drilling[1], which I also oppose.

The point is - human nature (re: greedy and negligent idiots) makes current reactor tech unsafe. The potential fallout (pun intended) is not worth the significant risk.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwater_Horizon_oil_spill



If your technology has reached the point where human error and negligence is the primary source of risk, you've succeeded. That is the goal of producing all reliable technologies. Of course, at that point, your system design primarily exists to prevent human errors from causing harm (for example, yesterday there was a news report that a Fukushima cleanup worker managed to engage a pump that would dump a bunch of radioactive water in the wrong place. He was saved by a backup system.")


> If your technology has reached the point where human error and negligence is the primary source of risk, you've succeeded.

If all it takes is one earthquake or distracted technician to potentially vaporize a suburb, then your tech has not yet succeeded.

Safety regimes to minimize human error are great, but time and time again they are bypassed due to greed, negligence and idiocy. The Fukushima backup system you mention is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about - but they need to be comprehensive, redundant, and responsibly audited (the part that scares me the most).




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: