Here is a link to a documentary article on the first non-military nuclear disaster in the world. For those of you who were not around when it happened, it involved a reactor core meltdown at one of the four reactors at the Three Mile Island power station in Pennsylvania thirty years ago. In a stark contrast to the Chernobyl disaster seven years later, no one was killed or even injured. It makes for interesting reading… Click here

I’m not convinced that I agree with the conclusions drawn in the article; I can see overwhelming evidence in both directions about nuclear power, pro and con. The thing that always bothered me about nuclear power is the original cost, both in terms of capital (does it really ever show a positive payback?) and ecology – is the ecological cost of construction and producing the fuel and disposing of the spent fuel less than the damage of an equivalent new modern thermal power plant? I don’t know.

What do you think? Does anyone have a rigorous, non-biased accounting on either aspect?

Ciao for now,

Craig
for
Sue & Craig Websites

.