Why is Japan still using nuclear power?

Because that's make COOMZILLA COOM BIG ONES

Attached: IMMA COOMING UGHHHHHH BANZAI.jpg (1200x510, 56K)

Why not? Because of one accident? Japs aren't the kinds of faggots that go looking to destroy a useful technology just because an accident happens.
Hell their worst nuke accident involving radiation was barely known in the west.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokaimura_nuclear_accident

I'm pretty sure nuclear power is bad. Regardless of country, everyone should switch to a combination of wind, solar, hydro, and geothermal.

This

Attached: rtx1b6qf.jpg (410x298, 23K)

Attached: EveryoneShouldBeKilled.jpg (300x300, 39K)

good luck explaining this to idiots, though. way better to have groundwater pollution from fracking, coal dams collapsing and destroying entire cities, and mass use of rare metals in inefficient solar.

globohomo extorts huge prices for renewable energy as they call it
easier way would be to make the systems without having to waste millions buying from globohomo

Japan has very few natural resources that could be used for generating electricity: no coal and no oil. The result is that Japan needs to import massive amounts of it from other countries which creates two potential problems: 1) It's expensive, 2) You're reliant on other countries.

Now it should be noted that Japan doesn't have naturally occurring Uranium either, however, this is less of a problem regarding importing it, due to the greater efficiency of Uranium (which means you would have to import less of it).

Now when looking at the disaster at Fukushima Daiichi in 2011, some things should be observed:

1) The accident wasn't caused by an inherent failure of the nuclear power plant, but by an earthquake.
2) When looking at the casualties of the accident, you'll find that the direct radioactive contamination only resulted in 1 fatality, all other deaths were caused by things like evacuation (which proved to be unnecessary, since the contamination zone was relatively small).
3) The accident wasn't unexpected in any way. Both the Japanese government, the scientific community, and TEPCO (the owner of the power plant) were aware of the potential problems with the facility AHEAD OF TIME. Examples of these problems were, to name a few, a seawall that was insufficiently high, a risky location for backup generators, etc. If a new governance structure was put in place (limiting phenomena like regulatory capture), a new accident of this type would have been avoided.

Now if you take into account other things like
1) The inherent safety of nuclear power plants (risk analysis shows that reactor failure chance is less than 1 in 1 000 000)
2) The efficiency of nuclear energy (cost/MW)
3) Virtually no carbon emissions

Nuclear energy is actually a really good option for many countries, including Japan.

Attached: 1565093606660.png (3078x2564, 120K)

All those solutions are inefficient and are badly impacting the environment weither because of the effort of setting them up in enough number to compensate for void left when you turn off a nuclear power plant, or through use and wear. See flock of birds getting wiped out my wind turbines or harmful chemicals leaking out of aging solar panels.
If you sea niggers knew how to properly build a nuclear power plant there wouldn't be a problem.

Because they can?

Attached: you know.jpg (1012x675, 115K)

They arent pussies , you think a little radiation ever stopped them?

>should switch to a combination of wind, solar, hydro, and geothermal
Yeah. Because as if agriculture and mining doesn't fuck the planet's terrestrial ecosystems bad enough, let's really fuck it up with blunt terra-forming!

Attached: 1213088800337.png (771x217, 33K)

They need to feed godzilla somehow

Not every country can be reliant on exclusively renewable energy sources:

Hydro is only available in a specific geographical layout: for instance, you'll need both a large body of water and an elevated landmass (like a mountain). If you look at my country (The Netherlands) Hydropower isn't an option because most of the land is below sea level.

Geothermal is also dependant on geographical circumstances, excluding many countries from using it.

Now when you look at Solar and Wind power, they only provide electricity when either the sun is shining, or when the wind is blowing sufficiently hard enough. For this reason they are unreliable, and you cannot be exclusively dependant on them.

("But wait", you might say, "what about batteries to store the electricity for when the sun is not shining/wind is not blowing!". This is not possible. Not only would it require massive amounts of windmills/solar farms, the other problem is that battery technology cannot become good enough for this to be an option on a large enough scale like powering an entire city/country).

Now I'm not saying that we shouldn't use renewable energy at all. In some cases, it is a good option for power. But thinking you can power an entire country with it, is impossible and wishful thinking.

Attached: 1565741495925.png (10x10, 394)

Mostly it's because they are actually hoping for monsters.
I mean, why else would you put a nuclear power station next to a faultline in a tsunami zone, and then put the emergency generators that stop a catastrophic meltdown in the basement?
The Japanese aren't thick. This was clearly done deliberately to feed the future Japanese film industry.

Attached: big in japan.gif (500x299, 544K)

Yeah it's the best until you have a minor accident and all the skin melts off your body like that Jap meme pic

Less lives than wind, water and solar? Yeah nah. Even the first responder memes aside, how much cancer and potato kids has every small hiccup caused do you reckon

Yes, you should follow Germany and start burning coal.

yeah or maybe don´t fuck with the US-DS and get harpped
nothing wrong with atomic power per se

>yeah maybe don't commit human errors ever

human error my ass

Fuck off, retard.

forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-deathprint-a-price-always-paid/#251055cc709b

nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-source.html

visualcapitalist.com/worlds-safest-source-energy/

nextbigfuture.com/2016/06/update-of-death-per-terawatt-hour-by.html

Suck my cock, you enormous shithead. Show me some stats if you wanna make a point.

People like you are the reason we haven't all swapped to nuclear power. People like you are the ones raping the Earth for retarded power sources when the safest, most effective power source is right in front of us.

I'd tell you to die in a nuclear inferno, but that'll almost certainly never happen, unfortunately.

Even if you take into account human errors, it's still way safer than any other (viable) alternative.

Think about the casualties resultant of air pollution from burning coal, wood, etc.

What's your plan? Just stop using electricity?

>inb4 muh green energy
You cannot be entirely dependant on renewables if you want to power an entire country. At least consider nuclear energy as a viable alternative for transitioning until we've found a renewable energy source that's actually good enough.

Fucking subkraut.

Oh look (((forbes))) and a bunch of literally who shitty econ blogs shilling for cheap energy sources that they will never have to live next to

Because they didn't get cucked by hippie faggots who believe in some utopian energy plan like knee-jerking eurofags did.

>I have no argument
I hope you fall off a roof installing solar equipment.

kek

Attached: 1564222236344.jpg (640x559, 23K)

My argument is that I don't want to look like pic related when a tech has had a bad day you seething retard

Attached: Hisashi-Ouchi-Tokaimura-Nuclear-Accident-3.jpg (750x481, 71K)

technologyreview.com/s/602051/fail-safe-nuclear-power/
i can't wait for the chinks to get btfo by their new reactor they cant design shit
but nuclear is safer overall

My argument is that nuclear power has caused less death, and is safer than literally every other power source and I provided four links to information supporting what I said. All you've said is "Radiation bad, me dum dum". If you have an actual fucking point, make it, or you're just being retarded. You're not retarded, are you user?

You're more likely to have a car smash into your room right this moment than have that ever happen to you ever.

I'd rather have that happen than become whatever is going on with him.

jej

Attached: 1562725626719.png (359x359, 184K)

Germany found a better solution, they just import so many stone age living niggers that soon nobody will notice that there's no power and living in caves or mudhuts will be widely accepted.

lol ouchi litteraly got a ouchi because him and his friend were lazy bastards who broke all the safety protocols trying to enrich uranium. if you're that dumb you deserve to be made an example of.

You're behaving like an anti-vax facebook mom cherrypicking examples that have an infinitesimal chance of happening despite massive amounts of empirical data that vaccines are generally incredibly safe,

German (((men))) burn coal to keeps the lights on, their women warm the bed by burning coal as well.

this. japanese are cold and pragmatic.

The main problem with nuclear power, from an existential viewpoint, is that it produces material that is harmful to us as a species. It will fuck with our DNA. And it carries on doing this for periods far longer than we can expect human civilizations, written memory and high culture to exist.
If we suffer a civilization fall, a new dark age, we have have left them a toxic legacy of our shit lying round that will harm our descendants for thousands of years to come, and they won't even know what's causing it.
This has the potential to severely weaken the species at a time when we will already be knocked back hard.
You would have to be a literal caveman luddite to not see this as a bad thing.

The fact that it can affect DNA of living humans, doesn't mean that 1) it will on any reasonable scale, 2) it is threatening to the survival of the human species

1) Nuclear accidents are incredibly rare. Therefore only a really small group of human genomes will ever be affected by radioactive contamination in this way. Hell, if you look at X-ray machines or cancer treatment you'll find that WAY MORE people's genomes could have been altered in this way.

I agree with you that there are potential unforeseen consequences of nuclear energy, but if you were logically consistent you would have to banish X-rays, radiotherapy, etc. as well

2) DNA alteration by radioactive contamination is also unlikely to actually have a noticeable effect on the human species because the vast majority of DNA "fuck ups" are a) irrelevant for sexual reproduction, or b) get repaired over time

>See flock of birds getting wiped out by wind turbines
cats kill far more than wind turbines per year, something like 7 figures
>harmful chemicals leaking out of aging solar panels
harmful compared to radiation?

oh, and obviously I'm an american. pretty sure japanese people generally don't post here.

see

>harmful chemicals leaking out of aging solar panels
>harmful compared to radiation?

There's actually a reasonable concern with solar panels leaking chemicals because 1) the chemicals are elemental, therefore they do not decay (unlike the byproducts/waste of nuclear reactors), and 2) build solar panels in the middle of cities, on their homes, in greenhouses, etc. Because of this way more people get into contact with these chemicals, than with potential radioactive contamination caused by nuclear energy.

As if France is any better, lul. U need some uncle Adolph ASAP.

>doesn't mean that 1) it will on any reasonable scale, 2) it is threatening to the survival of the human species
Plutonium is the most toxic substance known to man. Because of it's amazing ability to chuck out cancer causing rays, a particle too small to measure with anything less than a geiger counter can still kill you with a string of intestinal tumours decades later.
Current US policy is to contain medium level waste, containing this metal and other long term hazardour materials, in open trenches out in the desert. The thinking is the sideways radiation will hit the trench wall and the upward radiation doesn't matter because it's miles from anywhere important (for now).
Imagine a tribe of hunter gatherers coming across this mess 4,560 years from now.
The whole point of an existential threat is that it's based on something which you hope will never happen, but if it does will have unacceptable levels of damage, leading to an absolute need for prevention...no matter how unlikely the occurance.
We simply aren't doing that with nuclear waste. And until we do, we shouldn't be fucking aroujnd with the stuff.
This is a better (old school, tried and trusted tech) way of doing it.
youtube.com/watch?v=LMWIgwvbrcM

>Because of this way more people get into contact with these chemicals
except they don't, because those chemicals aren't airborne or pouring into the sea every time a natural disaster hits, or at all. protip, don't lick solar panels.

bc it doesnt want to import and burn the coal

bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49567197

I agree with you that virtually all nuclear waste should be stored in safer ways (like in the video you've linked, or deep geological storage, etc).

I thought you were talking about nuclear power plant sites themselves, which is why I pointed out the relatively small danger radioactive contamination poses to human reproduction in that situation.

Kek

Modern nuclear power designs actually don’t produce much waste. Like a few pounds per year instead of a few tonnes. But we’re too retarded as a society to fund building them. I blame the welfare state for lowering white’s IQ’s and Niggers and Spics because they’re already retarded.

X ray technologist here, we make sure to minimise dosage and every patient here( gonna assume its the truth for the rest of the 1st world) has its yearly dose recorded in his medical dossier. Docs will try to avoid heavy dosage techniques ( like PETscan) unless the risk of missing the underlying problem is too high. In a well controled environment a bunch of well done X rays are less harmful than taking a plane.

Problem isn't that japan is using nuclear power, but that all countries doing it are using ancient fucking technology.

at least our nuclear plants don't explode.

NUCLEAR POWER is *AWESOME*!!!

Airplanes and cars and trains have CRASHES. Why are YOU still using THEM???

Attached: asuka.bored.jpg (324x356, 28K)

You have millions of sploddy muzzshits living in your country.
The correct statement would be
>at least our nuclear plants haven't exploded yet

the REAL question is why are they still using nuclear pressure bombs that produce explosive gases and have no fail safes. all existing reactors should be phased out and replaced with liquid fluoride thorium.

>It's the best possible source of electricity, if you don't count the occasional nuclear accident.
China will have more nuclear reactors, but it gets around the nuclear accident problem by putting them offshore on large platforms. If the reactor has a problem, the thing can be towed further away from the coast. If it suddenly melts down, the current will carry the clockwise ocean currents will carry pollution away to Japan, Korea, Russia, and the USA's coasts and fishing areas.

Attached: Radiation_worldwide(Bosai.An.Educational.JourneyNHK).jpg (720x404, 71K)

>It's the best possible source of electricity,
Yes if you dont live in tsunami/earthquace area like Japan.

How much lung cancer has coal caused over the last 200+ years?

Nuclear power is for Europeans who dont live on the edge of tectonic plates

pollution is fake and spread by (((the renewable jew))) duh

Except there are no bad days. there is only incompetence. Chernobyl was incompetence, and so was Fukushima. Fukushima didn't happen just because of the earthquake - the fail safes that were suppose to cool the cores in a meltdown scenario failed, and that's incompetent design.

because it's the best

Jesus Christ this is a God damn retarded post. I hope you're not actually a jap or else you're all fucked

Just wow. You're the most retarded jap in existence.

Nuclear is the cleanest, safest, most economical power source and creates the least pollution.

Hippies hate it because they're retarded and apparently.. you are also retarded