And of the dozens or hundreds of predicted deaths; how many have happened?
Read the following:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444772404577589270444059332.html
The illnesses and deaths are yet unfolding. Cancers take a while to develop and interim deaths will not be reported as such. Radioactive waste suppresses immune functioning so it will look like other unexplained illnesses have risen in the population in the short term.
Russia is shocked that Japan has decided not to relocate citizens living in contaminated zones which, at comparable levels in Russia, were declared permanent evacuation zones. I wish it were possible for Japan to escape the hardships of debility and death but they are human like those studied in Chernobyl and the National Academy of Sciences BEIR VII report. What nuke apologists do is set the bar at ARS (acute radiation sickness - a short term intense illness) and then if people don’t have ARS, declare no harm to human health regardless of how many suffer the host of illnesses that develop over time.
I work at a nuclear power plant much closer to sea level than most of the nuclear plants in the United States. We have sealed vaults to protect some of the important pumps closer to sea level. The majority of the plant is clear of 70' above sea level. If we had a tsunami that high, then we there would be SUCH great death and destruction that our shutdown nuclear power plant would be a drop in a huge bucket. In fact, the same thing is true of Fukushima. (Did you actually read the WSJ article? If so, then you know that the deaths due to radiation exposure is far less than 10 percent of the deaths due to the tsunami itself.)
I don't have blinders on, I am not "bought and paid for" or a "corporate sellout". In fact I am a technician making hourly wages. I have to study all kinds of changes in power plant design and construction over the years, most of them due to problems that have occurred in power plants both in the US and in other countries (dozens of incidents contribute to improvements, not just three mile island). Thus we have redundancies in safety pumps, electrical buses, diesel generators, etc. The goal is that multiple failures will not result in catastrophe during a "design basis accident" (a kind of worse-case scenario).
All that being said, Fukushima was an eye-opening catastrophe. And TEPCO's response was deplorable. The American nuclear power industry is required to change available equipment and facilities and re-evaluate how emergency plans would be implemented in the case of an extended loss of off-site power (along with multiple failures of redundant diesel generators). And lack of plant access due to a natural disaster is now a part of our worst-case scenario planning. Just as security has responded (to the nth degree!) to possible terrorist threats, Emergency Planning is responding to possible natural disasters on the scale of Fukushima.
I don't think I will reassure those who say "We don't know or cannot measure the full effects of the leakage". I can say that controversy and conflict are much more interesting, exciting, newsworthy, and dramatic than realism and facts. And I know that outrage and adrenaline can be addictive.
I just gotta say there are people who fall down a flight of stairs to avoid something with a radioactive material sticker on it (this happened in the Navy, where the stairs are more like ladders). The guy was lucky he survived, no kidding. And the radioactive material was in transit and contained less curie content than a bag of fertilizer.
So, just in case you are still interested in the truth, then here it is, paraphrased and simplified: Other factors being equal, airline pilots are more likely to have occupational-related cancer than nuclear power plant workers. People who live in Denver (the mile-high city) receive a higher annual whole-body dose than the average US nuclear power plant worker. Smokers -- well do I really have to say it??
Groundwater contamination is a problem, radioactive waste leakage into the ocean is a problem, the cancellation of Yucca Mountain waste repository is a problem. (Utilities who contributed millions of dollars for the construction of Yucca Mountain are now having to arrange storage of used fuel on their own plantsites at great expense, and requiring increased security measures).
But if you want a little perspective, then consider the role of alcohol in murders, suicides, and accidental deaths. Less widespread --I mean less pervasive than the role of alcohol in all sorts of deaths-- and relatively less risky would be auto accidents in general. Somewhere around here (maybe more risky than auto accidents) would be lifestyle choices that lead to heart disease and obesity. (I am avoiding any introspection at this point). The agricultural, mining, and oil supply and refinery industries are the biggest occupational hazards (as I understand it). Demographically, some urban residents are quite likely to die of a gunshot wound.... I think that would be somewhere around here. Then as the relative risk continues to go down, we have accidental deaths at the home, infections contracted at hospitals, encounters with animals and snakes, recreational activities (this might be variable depending on the type of activity, eh?), choking and drowning, contracting a disease from an illegal immigrant -- oops did I really write that??? -- and then maybe something like being struck by lightning. Finally (deal with it, liberals) accidental gun deaths. Yes, they are indeed more rare than dying of being struck by lightning, no kidding.
So.... not that I am getting ready to go to the gym ... if you want to worry maybe we should all consider worrying about something we have control over!
The human performance standards, licensing and procedures, regulatory oversight, continuous "operating experience" lessons learned, security measures and screening of personnel, multiple and redundant control and safety systems including automatic shutdown designs, and a comprehensive plan for emergencies that includes power plant corporate leadership as well as local, state, and federal authorities, are all part of making a nuclear power plant safe -- YES, safe enough to live next to!
I will tell you what I tell my wife: if an emergency evacuation is declared due to the nuclear power plant 10 miles away, lock the doors and STAY INSIDE!! Windows can be open if you wish, but you might want to lock them due to possible looters. Do not get in the car and do not travel on the roads. The nuclear power plant is NOT a threat compared to the evacuation chaos, panic, and stupidity.
You life could depend on understanding relative risks, and knowing what an appropriate response would be in various circumstances.
"Careful with that axe, Eugene."