France: No Escape from Meltdowns?

Unlike previous nuclear disasters, Fukushima is contaminating a high-density population center of 127 million (337 inhabitants per km2),

Three Mile Island occurred in the vast United States of America (33 inhabitants per m2). Chernobyl hit the former Soviet Union, a sprawling empire so sparsely populated (13 inhabitants per km2) that the accident site could literally be spun off into independent countries, Ukraine and Byelorussia.

And France? With 115 inhabitants per km2, and a precious patrimony of famous wines, cheeses, agricultural crops and livestock in the millions, what would be the impact of a nuclear accident, whether explosive or slow leak on the future of the country?

As the map of nuclear power plants shows, there is literally no place in France that is “far away” or protected.
>more

2 Responses to “France: No Escape from Meltdowns?” »»

  1. Comment by Felipe L. | 04/06/11 at 11:23 am

    This looks a lot like fear mongering to me. There is no reason to think there might me an accident in France. Fukushima was an old plant where fiscalizing measures were overlooked. That is the lesson from Fukushima, not that we should get rid of nuclear plants, as the authors of the image convey.

    The image also makes me think that it might be unfeasible to reduce the dependence on nuclear power and much less to replace it with alternative energies, that unfortunately are not as efficient.

  2. Comment by Laurel Zuckerman | 04/07/11 at 11:36 pm

    We are only beginning to understand the lessons from Fukushima. Here are are few:
    1) It is a mistake to trust nuclear power companies like TEPCO to ensure safety, especially when they have close ties to the government or a financial stake.
    2) “Experts” make serious errors, such as a) locating nuclear reactors in seismic zones or b) leaving large quantities of spent fuel in “temporary” storage or c) failing to plan for the loss of electrical power (which can have many, many causes), or d) failing to update risk assessments when new facts become known (concerning the history of tsunamies in the regions, for example)
    3) Complacency, greed, inertia, arrogrance and wishful thinking can lead us to ignore inherently dangerous situations.
    4) High population density such as in Japan complicates evacuation of the affected area.
    5) Unexpected, catastrophic events can occur even in the most technologically advanced countries.

Leave a Reply »»