trubadour wrote:I like the Japanese attitude. they say they will import fuel and economise until they have figured out a technological solution. I've a feeling they will need to do a hell of a lot of economising. Taiwan would, too. Still, I can't see the problem with turning off the advertising, banning scooters and cars, turning off the displays, most of the A/C, etc. It would be fun.
It's not a technological solution that is required. Most of the plants in Japan have no tsunami risk. They just need to do things more openly and maintain safety standards.
It's not only tsunami risk we are talking about, obviously. The point is that given safety standards are, as it happens, never enough. There will always be something bigger and worse than was planned for. It's inevitable. The pro-neuclear lobby would have us believe the risk is so low that it is like winning the lottery with the same number a million times, or whatever; but then hey presto! here comes a wave.
It seems to many that a technological non-nuclear, non-fossil fuel solution has to be found. The elephant in the room is we live unsustainable lifestyles which cost us massively in terms of natural resources. It can not continue because supplies will run out and (if they did not, the environment would become terminally degraded as far as we are concerned, by and large). Nuclear should not be the solution because the consequences of the inevitable 'unforeseen event' are also too costly. It's like getting into debt to pay for an unhealthy lifestyle.
We are going to have to change the way we live.