GasBuddy Blog

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics	Add to favorite topics Post New Topic

Author	Topic: Does the earthquake in Japan change your mind about nuclear power?	Post a Reply Back to Topics

101Speedster Champion Author Ventura Posts:30,450 Points:2,719,595 Joined:May 2005	Message Posted: Mar 12, 2011 1:02:45 PM Ignore 101Speedster Report Abuse Does the earthquake in Japan change your views about having nuclear power plants near your house and powering your house? I live in California which is prone to earthquakes, as is Japan. If it can happen there, it can happen here. Someone is going to have to convince me that the people of Japan are not in danger because of those out-of-control nuclear reactors. At this point, I would rather stick with safer RENEWABLE types of energy like solar; wind; geothermal; plant biofuels; and hydroelectric, including that from the ocean: tidal barrage, tidal stream, and wave power.

101Speedster

Champion Author
Ventura

Posts:30,450
Points:2,719,595
Joined:May 2005

Message Posted: Mar 12, 2011 1:02:45 PM

Ignore 101Speedster Report Abuse

Does the earthquake in Japan change your views about having nuclear power plants near your house and powering your house?

I live in California which is prone to earthquakes, as is Japan. If it can happen there, it can happen here.

Someone is going to have to convince me that the people of Japan are not in danger because of those out-of-control nuclear reactors.

At this point, I would rather stick with safer RENEWABLE types of energy like solar; wind; geothermal; plant biofuels; and hydroelectric, including that from the ocean: tidal barrage, tidal stream, and wave power.

REPLIES (newest first)Ignore Short Messages

First

Next Last

Shockjock1961 Champion Author Illinois Posts:20,148 Points:2,188,085 Joined:Apr 2006	Message Posted: Apr 11, 2013 10:36:35 AM Ignore Shockjock1961 Report Abuse I quite often post links speedy. You simply ignore them because the don't support your liberal views...
HotRod10 Champion Author Wyoming Posts:2,291 Points:40,590 Joined:Oct 2006	Message Posted: Apr 11, 2013 10:36:13 AM Ignore HotRod10 Report Abuse Well speedy, as long as you continue to avoid the arguments in favor of attacking those actually making the arguments, I figured I'd have some fun too.
101Speedster Champion Author Ventura Posts:30,450 Points:2,719,595 Joined:May 2005	Message Posted: Apr 11, 2013 10:24:34 AM Ignore 101Speedster Report Abuse That's intelligent, Hotrod.
HotRod10 Champion Author Wyoming Posts:2,291 Points:40,590 Joined:Oct 2006	Message Posted: Apr 11, 2013 10:03:09 AM Ignore HotRod10 Report Abuse "...you never seem to post any links." Maybe Shockjock has better things to do than post links to prove to you what should be obvious to anyone with 2 brain cells to rub together.
101Speedster Champion Author Ventura Posts:30,450 Points:2,719,595 Joined:May 2005	Message Posted: Apr 11, 2013 12:35:06 AM Ignore 101Speedster Report Abuse >>You present a dire quote without any substantiating evidence...<< You criticize everyone's links, Shock, but you never seem to post any links.
oilpan4 Champion Author Virginia Posts:12,062 Points:306,900 Joined:Jul 2006	Message Posted: Apr 10, 2013 3:33:26 PM Ignore oilpan4 Report Abuse "I already showed that short-term fluctuations are typical, and without a link," His method for promoting nuclear baby deaths and global warming appear to be identical: Cherry pick data to support the predetermined conclusion and lie by omission to make it all fit.
Shockjock1961 Champion Author Illinois Posts:20,148 Points:2,188,085 Joined:Apr 2006	Message Posted: Apr 10, 2013 3:20:39 PM Ignore Shockjock1961 Report Abuse "It's funny that when someone posts a link and I quote part of it that it is considered "fearmongering without warrant." You present a dire quote without any substantiating evidence... VOILA`! Unwarranted fearmongering... [Edited by: Shockjock1961 at 4/10/2013 3:25:54 PM EST]
HotRod10 Champion Author Wyoming Posts:2,291 Points:40,590 Joined:Oct 2006	Message Posted: Apr 10, 2013 1:09:08 PM Ignore HotRod10 Report Abuse Nice speedy, quote rumbleseat and add nothing, that's very convincing. I already showed that short-term fluctuations are typical, and without a link, the stats can't be verified or scrutinized. Why did he pick the 4 weeks before and 10 weeks after? Why not the 10 weeks before or the 4 weeks after? Probably because they would show that the so-called increase in deaths was just a random fluctuation. [Edited by: HotRod10 at 4/10/2013 1:10:41 PM EST]
101Speedster Champion Author Ventura Posts:30,450 Points:2,719,595 Joined:May 2005	Message Posted: Apr 10, 2013 12:49:42 PM Ignore 101Speedster Report Abuse It's funny that when someone posts a link and I quote part of it that it is considered "Fearmongering without warrant."
Shockjock1961 Champion Author Illinois Posts:20,148 Points:2,188,085 Joined:Apr 2006	Message Posted: Apr 10, 2013 11:04:53 AM Ignore Shockjock1961 Report Abuse Speedy is back to his usual... Fearmongering without warrant...
101Speedster Champion Author Ventura Posts:30,450 Points:2,719,595 Joined:May 2005	Message Posted: Apr 10, 2013 10:38:55 AM Ignore 101Speedster Report Abuse >>This amounts to an increase of 35% (the total for the entire U.S. rose about 2.3%), and is statistically significant. Of further significance is that those dates include the four weeks before and the ten weeks after the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant disaster.<<
HotRod10 Champion Author Wyoming Posts:2,291 Points:40,590 Joined:Oct 2006	Message Posted: Apr 10, 2013 10:32:47 AM Ignore HotRod10 Report Abuse rumbleseat, care to provide a link to those stats? I didn't find the ones you put up, but I did find the weekly totals for "Deaths in 122 U.S. cities" grouped by region. In the Pacific region, in the age less than 1 year category, the totals were: Week ending Jan. 12, 2011: 38 Week ending Feb. 20, 2011: 29 Week ending March 12, 2011: 20 Week ending March 19, 2011: 29 Week ending March 26, 2011: 25 Week ending April 02, 2011: 16 Week ending April 09, 2011: 17 Week ending April 16, 2011: 23 Week ending April 23, 2011: 25 Week ending April 30, 2011: 28 Week ending May 20, 2011: 23 Week ending June 25, 2011: 30 Week ending Aug. 27, 2011: 34 cdc.gov/mmwr/index2011 As you can see, there's a lot of variation, much more than your 35%, and the lowest were in April. Quoting statistics about the total number of children who died FROM ALL CAUSES proves nothing except that fatality rates fluctuate wildly over short periods of time. If you had fatality rates over 6-month or 1-year periods, and they showed an increase from, say the first half of 2011 to the last half of 2011 from causes linked to radiation, you might have something to post besides random statistics that mean nothing. "Predicted future cancer deaths due to accumulated radiation exposures in the population living near Fukushima are predicted to be extremely low to none.[24] In 2013, two years after the incident, the World Health Organization indicated that the residents of the area who were evacuated were exposed to so little radiation that radiation induced health impacts are likely to be below detectable levels." Even right around Fukushima, the effects of radiation are negligible. "A thyroid ultrasound screening programme is currently[2013] ongoing in the entire Fukushima prefecture, this screening programme is, due to the screening effect, likely to lead to an increase in the incidence of thyroid disease due to early detection of non-symptomatic disease cases." Source There's the answer to the increase in hypothyroidism, more intensive screening - if you look closely for something that was not looked for before, you find a lot of previously-undetected cases. [Edited by: HotRod10 at 4/10/2013 10:35:59 AM EST]
oilpan4 Champion Author Virginia Posts:12,062 Points:306,900 Joined:Jul 2006	Message Posted: Apr 10, 2013 2:30:08 AM Ignore oilpan4 Report Abuse 1) yes. 2) California has plants on fault lines like japan but I believe they have been shut down or are going to be shut down in a few years. 3) No they would never run single pass water through a reactor core. Saftey systems are largely the same since GE built japans nuclear power plants.
Duperza Veteran Author Pittsburgh Posts:351 Points:111,590 Joined:Jan 2013	Message Posted: Apr 9, 2013 8:11:47 PM Ignore Duperza Report Abuse Well, considering Japan and the United States: 1) Are the plant designs the same? 2) Are the locations the same? Are they both on active fault lines and susceptible to earthquakes and tsunamis simultaneously? 3) Would American plants put seawater into nuclear reactors to cool them as a last resort measure, knowing there are impurities or do American nuclear power plants have another method? Are the safety protocols same or different? [Edited by: Duperza at 4/9/2013 8:12:44 PM EST]
rumbleseat Champion Author Winnipeg Posts:22,942 Points:3,532,320 Joined:Oct 2002	Message Posted: Apr 9, 2013 6:07:45 PM Ignore rumbleseat Report Abuse The recent CDC Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report indicates that some cities in the northwest, Boise, Seattle, Portland, plus northern California cities of Santa Cruz, Sacramento, San Francisco, San Jose, and Berkeley, reported the following data on deaths among those younger than one year of age: 4 weeks ending March 19, 2011 - 37 deaths (avg. 9.25 per week) 10 weeks ending May 28, 2011 - 125 deaths (avg.12.50 per week) This amounts to an increase of 35% (the total for the entire U.S. rose about 2.3%), and is statistically significant. Of further significance is that those dates include the four weeks before and the ten weeks after the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant disaster. [Edited by: rumbleseat at 4/9/2013 6:08:33 PM EST]
HotRod10 Champion Author Wyoming Posts:2,291 Points:40,590 Joined:Oct 2006	Message Posted: Apr 9, 2013 2:05:41 PM Ignore HotRod10 Report Abuse "Boulder, Colorado a “hot spot” for Fukushima fallout — None of their other US or Canadian samples came close to Boulder’s contamination, except Portland which was even higher" Marco Kaltofen, WPI Oh No! Boulder's only 100 miles from me! Panic! Oh wait, maybe it's just the concentration of liberals/progressives in Boulder. It makes more sense than the Fukushima fallout traveling 6,000 miles, without dispersing, and contaminating soil in Boulder, CO and Portland, OR, but nowhere else. [Edited by: HotRod10 at 4/9/2013 2:10:44 PM EST]
Shockjock1961 Champion Author Illinois Posts:20,148 Points:2,188,085 Joined:Apr 2006	Message Posted: Apr 9, 2013 1:25:00 PM Ignore Shockjock1961 Report Abuse "I don't think Shock cares because he doesn't live on the west coast" There is nothing to care about speedy. It's erroneous information, so what's there to care about?
101Speedster Champion Author Ventura Posts:30,450 Points:2,719,595 Joined:May 2005	Message Posted: Apr 9, 2013 12:01:29 PM Ignore 101Speedster Report Abuse >>Researchers working with the Radiation and Public Health Project (RPHP) in New York have discovered that the Fukushima nuclear disaster has had far-reaching health effects showing that young children born on the US West Coast are 28% more likely to develop congenital hypothyroidism.<< I don't think Shock cares because he doesn't live on the west coast -- or is it because he only cares about having cheap electricity?
HotRod10 Champion Author Wyoming Posts:2,291 Points:40,590 Joined:Oct 2006	Message Posted: Apr 8, 2013 5:19:31 PM Ignore HotRod10 Report Abuse Nice article rumbleseat, too bad the authors have such a poor record for scientific integrity and objectivity. From that right-wing rag, The New York Times: "The group's work is, to say the very least, controversial. Though members of the group have published a handful of articles in peer-reviewed journals, including Archives of Environmental Health, their credibility with the scientific establishment hovers near zero. Detractors say they obsess over amounts of radiation that are insignificant compared with the dose humans receive each day from cosmic rays, soil and other natural sources. And their few government contracts have left a short trail of dissatisfied local officials sharply critical of their methods, their scientific objectivity and their results. ''What they do is what's popularly referred to as junk science,'' said Dr. Joshua Lipsman, the health commissioner in Westchester County, home of the embattled Indian Point nuclear power plant and, according to the Radiation and Public Health Project, children with the highest strontium 90 readings in the region. ''We found a number of scientific errors both in measurement and process in their proposals.''" [Edited by: HotRod10 at 4/8/2013 5:24:37 PM EST]
Shockjock1961 Champion Author Illinois Posts:20,148 Points:2,188,085 Joined:Apr 2006	Message Posted: Apr 8, 2013 9:18:10 AM Ignore Shockjock1961 Report Abuse Changing the subject are we speedy?
rumbleseat Champion Author Winnipeg Posts:22,942 Points:3,532,320 Joined:Oct 2002	Message Posted: Apr 8, 2013 12:55:33 AM Ignore rumbleseat Report Abuse Natural Health News — If you are still living with the belief that disasters that happen in another country happen ‘somewhere else’, here’s a stark reminder that there is no ‘somewhere else’ on our planet. Researchers working with the Radiation and Public Health Project (RPHP) in New York have discovered that the Fukushima nuclear disaster has had far-reaching health effects showing that young children born on the US West Coast are 28% more likely to develop congenital hypothyroidism. Fukushima fallout – thyroid damage in US children
101Speedster Champion Author Ventura Posts:30,450 Points:2,719,595 Joined:May 2005	Message Posted: Apr 8, 2013 12:19:39 AM Ignore 101Speedster Report Abuse Does Japan still only have two nuclear reactors working? How long is it going to take for the blackouts to start? [Edited by: 101Speedster at 4/8/2013 12:20:49 AM EST]
Shockjock1961 Champion Author Illinois Posts:20,148 Points:2,188,085 Joined:Apr 2006	Message Posted: Apr 6, 2013 11:59:23 AM Ignore Shockjock1961 Report Abuse "Shock is the one that wants to use car analogies" Only because driving a car is far more dangerous then living next to a nuclear reactor...
101Speedster Champion Author Ventura Posts:30,450 Points:2,719,595 Joined:May 2005	Message Posted: Apr 5, 2013 2:15:02 PM Ignore 101Speedster Report Abuse Shock is the one that wants to use car analogies
HotRod10 Champion Author Wyoming Posts:2,291 Points:40,590 Joined:Oct 2006	Message Posted: Apr 5, 2013 1:32:56 PM Ignore HotRod10 Report Abuse If we're going to use car analogies Speedster, then how about this one - would you say it was reasonable to stop making cars because of how unsafe it is to drive a Ford Pinto? Most people would say we can, and do, make much safer cars today, and don't think twice about the risks associated with driving, which are, statistically speaking, infinitely higher than those from a modern nuclear reactor.
Shockjock1961 Champion Author Illinois Posts:20,148 Points:2,188,085 Joined:Apr 2006	Message Posted: Apr 4, 2013 9:24:10 AM Ignore Shockjock1961 Report Abuse "Car accidents do not make entire cities and/or counties uninhabitable." So what you are saying speedy, is that you value land over lives lost? The land will eventually become habitable again. The lives lost are gone forever.... [Edited by: Shockjock1961 at 4/4/2013 9:26:31 AM EST]
HotRod10 Champion Author Wyoming Posts:2,291 Points:40,590 Joined:Oct 2006	Message Posted: Apr 4, 2013 9:09:36 AM Ignore HotRod10 Report Abuse "Car accidents do not make entire cities and/or counties uninhabitable." Neither have any nuclear plants built in the last 35 years.
101Speedster Champion Author Ventura Posts:30,450 Points:2,719,595 Joined:May 2005	Message Posted: Apr 4, 2013 12:22:37 AM Ignore 101Speedster Report Abuse Car accidents do not make entire cities and/or counties uninhabitable.
Shockjock1961 Champion Author Illinois Posts:20,148 Points:2,188,085 Joined:Apr 2006	Message Posted: Mar 18, 2013 10:03:35 AM Ignore Shockjock1961 Report Abuse No but there are far more people killed in a year by car accidents then have ever been killed by a nuclear accident. So should we outlaw cars too speedy since they inflict so much death and destruction, far more then you see with nuclear power plants?
101Speedster Champion Author Ventura Posts:30,450 Points:2,719,595 Joined:May 2005	Message Posted: Mar 18, 2013 9:57:09 AM Ignore 101Speedster Report Abuse >>All it takes is one car accident to ruin your day, yet that keeps very few from driving...<< Does a car accident make almost 20 square miles of land unusable for years, decades, or longer?
Gas_Eyes Champion Author Dallas Posts:2,692 Points:647,785 Joined:Mar 2011	Message Posted: Mar 18, 2013 7:23:09 AM Ignore Gas_Eyes Report Abuse Rationing energy will hurt the country's finances.
oilpan4 Champion Author Virginia Posts:12,062 Points:306,900 Joined:Jul 2006	Message Posted: Mar 17, 2013 3:36:39 PM Ignore oilpan4 Report Abuse "Japan rationed power to big consumers and the average disciplined Japanese rationed electricity on a self-imposed basis".. I can see the japinese doing this. Americans on the other hand would try to crash grid so the power company would have to get off their cans and fix the problem. Remember there is more money to be made by prolonging a problem, encouraging a shortage than in fixing the root problem.
ldheinz Champion Author Chicago Posts:19,055 Points:2,361,795 Joined:May 2006	Message Posted: Mar 13, 2013 6:31:36 PM Ignore ldheinz Report Abuse Another point, 101Speedster, is that by restricting Nuclear power plants, you are actually increasing the radiation emitted into the environment, as burning coal creates vastly more nuclear waste than a nuclear power plant does. This is because coal has a lot of radioactive elements in it, and burning it concentrates the radioactivity.
ldheinz Champion Author Chicago Posts:19,055 Points:2,361,795 Joined:May 2006	Message Posted: Mar 13, 2013 2:43:52 PM Ignore ldheinz Report Abuse Nuclear reactors have many accidents, but most of them don't hurt anything at all. It takes a particularly bad accident, plus inadequate safeguards for anything bad to happen. Please keep in mind that the Chernobyl meltdown occurred because the reactor had been taken offline and a dangerous, unauthorized experiment was conducted with all of the safeguards disabled. In normal operation, that model reactor was used all over Eastern Europe for many years with no problems.
Shockjock1961 Champion Author Illinois Posts:20,148 Points:2,188,085 Joined:Apr 2006	Message Posted: Mar 13, 2013 2:34:11 PM Ignore Shockjock1961 Report Abuse All it takes is one car accident to ruin your day, yet that keeps very few from driving...
101Speedster Champion Author Ventura Posts:30,450 Points:2,719,595 Joined:May 2005	Message Posted: Mar 13, 2013 2:25:15 PM Ignore 101Speedster Report Abuse All it takes is one nuclear reactor accident, Idheinz, to ruin your whole day.
Shockjock1961 Champion Author Illinois Posts:20,148 Points:2,188,085 Joined:Apr 2006	Message Posted: Mar 13, 2013 1:28:27 PM Ignore Shockjock1961 Report Abuse Careful ldheinz... Your facts might get in the way of speedy's liberal fear mongering... [Edited by: Shockjock1961 at 3/13/2013 1:29:01 PM EST]
ldheinz Champion Author Chicago Posts:19,055 Points:2,361,795 Joined:May 2006	Message Posted: Mar 13, 2013 10:53:47 AM Ignore ldheinz Report Abuse Chernobyl had no containment building, 101Speedster. Most reactors do.
101Speedster Champion Author Ventura Posts:30,450 Points:2,719,595 Joined:May 2005	Message Posted: Mar 13, 2013 10:48:44 AM Ignore 101Speedster Report Abuse HotRod10: "Rationality doesn't seem to be a strong suit for the anti-nuclear crowd. It's all about the fear-mongering over negligible risks." >>The Chernobyl accident caused acute radiation sickness in 134 of the 600 workers who were at the site on the morning of the initial explosion and received high doses of radiation—80,000 to 1.6 million mrem, according to the UN report and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Of this group 28 people died within three months. Two others died due to injuries from the fire and radiation. And eventually as many as 4,000 people are expected to die as a result of radiation exposure from the Chernobyl plant, according to the World Health Organization. From a public health perspective, Chernobyl's greatest impact was an epidemic of thyroid cancer (more than 6,000 cases so far) among children and adolescents exposed to radiation, often by drinking contaminated cow's milk.<< That's not even taking into account the loss of the use of the land. Why are people so irrational regarding nuclear power? [Edited by: 101Speedster at 3/13/2013 10:50:08 AM EST]
HotRod10 Champion Author Wyoming Posts:2,291 Points:40,590 Joined:Oct 2006	Message Posted: Mar 13, 2013 10:11:39 AM Ignore HotRod10 Report Abuse "Not using them is crazy for the Japanese." Rationality doesn't seem to be a strong suit for the anti-nuclear crowd. It's all about the fear-mongering over negligible risks. [Edited by: HotRod10 at 3/13/2013 10:13:38 AM EST]
ldheinz Champion Author Chicago Posts:19,055 Points:2,361,795 Joined:May 2006	Message Posted: Mar 12, 2013 9:11:52 AM Ignore ldheinz Report Abuse Nuclear plants don't use external fuel supplies, which means that they cost just as much to NOT use as to use. Not using them is crazy for the Japanese.
Gas_Eyes Champion Author Dallas Posts:2,692 Points:647,785 Joined:Mar 2011	Message Posted: Mar 12, 2013 8:45:08 AM Ignore Gas_Eyes Report Abuse Not using nuclear is too expensive for Japan which is having economic problems.
Shockjock1961 Champion Author Illinois Posts:20,148 Points:2,188,085 Joined:Apr 2006	Message Posted: Mar 11, 2013 9:26:18 AM Ignore Shockjock1961 Report Abuse "Funny thing is, Shock, that the nuclear plants in Japan were shut down and the power did not go out." Better check your facts speedy. Not all the reactors were shut down (17 continued operation), power did go down, Japan rationed power to big consumers and the average disciplined Japanese rationed electricity on a self-imposed basis.. "Preliminary figures indicate that regions under conservation mandates have been able to meet reduction targets and even exceed them, providing a possible model of conservation’s potential when concerns about global warming are mounting. In the Tokyo area, the government is pushing to cut electricity use by 15 percent between 9 a.m. and 8 p.m. on weekdays to prevent blackouts — and on Thursday, for example, that target was met compared with last year. Japanese are bringing to the conservation drive a characteristic combination of national fervor, endurance, sloganeering, technology and social coercion. A “Super Cool Biz” campaign, which builds on the option of no-tie summer business attire begun in 2005, now encourages salarymen to dress down even further by wearing polo shirts or the traditional aloha-style shirts worn on the Japanese tropical islands of Okinawa. To back up the call to conserve, electricity reports that forecast the day’s power supply and track demand in real time have become as much a part of this summer as the scorching sun and humid air. They are delivered along with the weather on the morning news and announced along with the next stop aboard some trains. Government alerts are also sent to subscribers’ cellphones if overall demand nears capacity, prodding households to turn down the air-conditioner or, better yet, turn it off altogether."
101Speedster Champion Author Ventura Posts:30,450 Points:2,719,595 Joined:May 2005	Message Posted: Mar 11, 2013 12:06:20 AM Ignore 101Speedster Report Abuse >>Try to replace nuclear power with solar and the power will go out...<< Funny thing is, Shock, that the nuclear plants in Japan were shut down and the power did not go out. I don't think they have even installed any solar panels yet.
Gas_Eyes Champion Author Dallas Posts:2,692 Points:647,785 Joined:Mar 2011	Message Posted: Mar 10, 2013 6:11:28 PM Ignore Gas_Eyes Report Abuse The new Japanese Prime Minister is planning to certify all its nuclear plants and start operating them again in the future. A lot of Japanese do not like the idea.
Shockjock1961 Champion Author Illinois Posts:20,148 Points:2,188,085 Joined:Apr 2006	Message Posted: Mar 10, 2013 2:37:48 PM Ignore Shockjock1961 Report Abuse Try to replace nuclear power with solar and the power will go out...
101Speedster Champion Author Ventura Posts:30,450 Points:2,719,595 Joined:May 2005	Message Posted: Mar 10, 2013 12:07:19 PM Ignore 101Speedster Report Abuse Has the power gone off yet in Japan?
ldheinz Champion Author Chicago Posts:19,055 Points:2,361,795 Joined:May 2006	Message Posted: Mar 8, 2013 10:38:48 AM Ignore ldheinz Report Abuse Yes, China discovered that they can make solar panels cheaper than we can, so they are. That doesn't mean that they think that they are effective. They are learning what works and what doesn't.
oilpan4 Champion Author Virginia Posts:12,062 Points:306,900 Joined:Jul 2006	Message Posted: Mar 7, 2013 2:00:31 PM Ignore oilpan4 Report Abuse "Seems like China is putting up their share of solar panels also". An very small fraction of their power will come from solar. A few months ago I compared all the solar panel out put in the world to japans nuclear program. I was saying that if japan had all solar panels in the world, the amount of solar power produced by them could only replace a small fraction of what little old japans nuclear reactors put out. I think it came out to all the solar power in the world is only equal to something like 10% or 15% of the power japan's nuclear program produces. just to show how solar powering a developed nation wont work. [Edited by: oilpan4 at 3/7/2013 2:01:43 PM EST]
Gas_Eyes Champion Author Dallas Posts:2,692 Points:647,785 Joined:Mar 2011	Message Posted: Mar 7, 2013 10:49:20 AM Ignore Gas_Eyes Report Abuse China should also know better than to put nuclear plants near fault lines.