Fukushima

Check out this video from Potrblog on the radioactive rain in St. Louis from the Fukushima nuclear disaster. Let's put this together. We've created an energy source that was supposed to be inexpensive in dollars terms. One downside is that the energy source produces toxic waste that lasts for human purposes forever. Another downside is that if the energy source gets into the atmosphere the toxic effects can spread widely. Plutonium toxicity effects the genetic makeup of the victims so future generations as well the current population. Plutonium has a half life of 24,000 years, basically forever.

Nuclear plants as we've seen are complex systems. The space shuttle, a fighter jet, deep water oil wells and nuclear plants are examples of complex systems. Even my xbox is a complicated system but the relative consequences of failure of each one of these systems are at opposite ends of the spectrum.

Think about the consequences of nuclear failure, potential eternal poisoning of the land, generational sickness, basically eternal damnation of some land mass and it's population. Should we reconsider the cost benefit analysis of these complex systems? If the odds of failure are a million-to-one but the consequences are so grave then is it worth the risk? As we've seen, the odds of failure increase as the complexity of the system rises. It is virtually impossible for governments and corporations to measure the current economic benefit of these complex systems in comparison with the potentially catastrophic generational devastation caused by failure.