"Potential Cost Of A Nuclear Accident? So High It’s A Secret!"
IMO I don't even know why the potential cost is looked at.
If we are going to look at potential cost of an accident in something like power which we need for, well, pretty much survival - the why the hell don't we look at potential cost for something like a derivatives disaster - which is totally unnecessary, but can destroy the economy of the entire planet?
I can understand the fear of a neuclear accident - but, there are so many things we play with that have to be managed.
Surely to god, if we are worried about neculear power accidents - would not the first thing be to ban neuclear weapons?
After all, they are designed to go bang!
If we are serious about power and filling the gap between coal mains power and something magic - then lets look differently - put a major effort into making residences stand alone - it wouldn't be that hard the way technology is going - then run all mains power to industry.
Everything we do pollutes - coal, neuclear,, hydro, solar and wind - they are all huge environmental costs.
There are too many vested interests in the power game to get a good solution.
A small example - there is no inducement for solar hot water in Australia -at least nothing meaningful.
Everyone talks about solar electric panels - very inefficient environmentally and iffy cost wise - but there is little discussion on solar hot water - - something that can smack down a power bill dramitically and is environmentally pretty good - why?
Ditto using heat pumps capturing the differential between underground temp. And air temp. - common as duck poop in Northern Europe - almost unheard of here - why?
