What's New?
.	Fukushima Decontamination Report
.	CRCPD & CDC Grants for Volunteer Corps
.	America's Nuclear Future
.	February Newsletter
.	Boice Nominated President of NCRP
.	February Journal
.	February ORS
.	Schauer Given the Butterfly Award from Image Gently
.	Kase President's Report to IRPA
.	IRPA13 Accepting Posters

Upcoming Events
.	HPS Midyear - Issues in Waste Management 5-8 February 2012 Dallas, Texas
.	NRC Regulatory Information Conference NRC Regulatory Information Conference 13-15 March 2012 Rockville, Maryland
.	NCRP Annual Meeting 12-13 March 2012 Washington, DC
.	James E. Turner Memorial Symposium Call for Abstracts 18-19 April 2012 Oak Ridge Associated Universities, Pollard Auditorium, Oak Ridge, Tennessee
.	IRPA13 13-18 May 2012 Glasgow, Scotland
.	Canadian Radiation Protection Association (CRPA) Annual Meeting 27-30 May 2012 Halifax, Nova Scotia
.	ACS Undergrad Summer Schools 10 June- 20 July 2012
.	Nuclear Regulatory Commission Meeting Webcasts February 2012 Bethesda, Maryland

09 February 2012

Answer to Question #4056 Submitted to "Ask the Experts"

Category: Nuclear Power — Nuclear Accidents

The following question was answered by an expert in the appropriate field:

I am doing a research project about three major nuclear accidents: Tokaimura, Chernobyl, and Three Mile Island. How could these accidents have been avoided ? Do these incidents prove that nuclear power plants should be phased out? Why or why not?

There is a comprehensive summary of all three of these events on a previous Ask the Experts question. This link will give you an excellent summary of the events. Regarding your last two questions, those are philosophical in nature. Everything in life involves risk. All risks have benefits associated with them. At any given time we all decide whether the benefit of a given activity is worth the risk of that given activity. For instance, flying in an airplane provides a real benefit allowing us to get to places more quickly, yet planes do crash and people are killed. Generating electricity provides a real benefit to billions of people, yet ALL sources of power generation can and have caused injury and/or death to people. Does that mean we should phase out nuclear power as a method of power generation? In my opinion, no, because it is by far the cleanest source of large-scale power generation currently available. Is it without risks? No, but those risks can and have been managed for the past 40 to 50 years.

Linda Sewell, CHP

Answer posted on 27 October 2004. The information and material posted on this website is intended as general reference information only. Specific facts and circumstances may alter the concepts and applications of materials and information described herein. The information provided is not a substitute for professional advice and should not be relied upon in the absence of such professional advice specific to whatever facts and circumstances are presented in any given situation. Answers are correct at the time they are posted on the Website. Be advised that over time, some requirements could change, new data could be made available, or Internet links could change. For answers that have been posted for several months or longer, please check the current status of the posted information prior to using the responses for specific applications.