In evaluating the relevance of Wade Allison's article, we should bear in mind where he is coming from. Allison is a nuclear enthusiast who had an unusual response to the Fukushima nuclear catastrophe. Allison is a physicist (not a radiation biologist) who advocated not evacuation of Fukushima residents, but instead - to increase the "acceptable" limits on radiation exposure to be increased by as much as a thousandfold. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/british-physicist-wade-allison-calls-for-radical-increase-in-radiation-exposure-limits/story-e6frg6so-1226159573330

I venture that the author is probably of advanced years (three score years and ten?) and living in an Ivory Tower. He'll never be touched by exploding reactors.

He is born, with no chance of mutating in the womb. No chance of an assumed to be one in a thousand year event levelling Oxford like the Tsunami levelled Fukushima.

Its easy to minimise risks to people he'll never meet when the threats they suffer never darken his Keble College dinners.

Pete

I'm betting that if Dr Helen Caldicott were to read this article, she'd easily see the flaws. Personally, as with asbestos, there is no safe level of radiation, and the vicinity around Chernobyl and Fukushima will have to be no-go zones for a very very long time to come.

Likewise, on the economic side, getting a nuclear plant up and running requires massive subsidies from the public, and should anything go wrong, as luck will have it, guess who gets lumbered with the costs?

Also, decommissioning the monsters also costs an arm and a leg, so why not go for the safer, saner alternatives: solar, wind, tidal?

(forget about cold fusion: it's had its day)

Its this simple......dammed if we do and the same as you know. My thoughts is, find a way to defuse as the professor seemed to of not pointed out...and how can he....we are only just working out of how to store the stuff:)....I would like it right off the planet....but dammed if we don't.

Nuclear power....well...Iam still not happy or convinced it wont come back to bite us in future times....That's what Iam thinking.

If we can get it off the planet or defuse it..... Not Problem I see:)

Planet3

Nuclear Fission is the worst. It is the hot particles such as Caesium 137, plutonium, iodine etc that our bodies absorb and the radiation is with us for life causing cancer and birth deformities. No amount of hot particle radiation is safe.

Why has the Japanese Govt passed laws to give journos 10 yrs jail for publishing uncensored material? Why has the IAEA silenced the world Health Organisation on this matter of Fukushima ?

Studies done by 3 Russian scientists show that 1 million people died due to Chernobyl radiation. Fukushima is far worse than Chernobyl and continues to get worse.

It takes 5-10 yrs for the cancers to appear so the cause is difficult to prove.The corporate media is covering this up big time.http://fairewinds.org/ Arnie Gunderson is a highly qualified nuke scientist of 40 yrs experience and he says words to the contrary. He is qualified in both commissioning and de-commissioning of nuke reactors.

A lot of careers and fortunes are dependant upon nuke power and the spin off of nuke weapons. It is destroying life on this planet

A very well written article.

There is no such thing as absolute safety. Nuclear is, however, an order of magnitude safer than coal.

Even better would be thorium powered reactors.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium_fuel_cycle

Fortunately the Chinese, Indians and Norwegians, uninhibited by that motely crew of smug, self-righteous narcissists that call themselves "Green", are investigating the technology.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24638816