Thailand Not Ready To Build Nuclear Power Plant

[jfchandler]

Soutpeel, your comment above is legitimate to a point... But I never said such things don't happen elsewhere.... I was solely commenting on the state of Thailand.

However, to most rational people, the track record here in Thailand shows pretty clearly that the extent of the institutional disfunctionalism here is far more widespread/pervasive that in most western countries such as you reference.

Japan's track record with nuclear safety, leaving aside the role of natural catastrophies (earthquake and tsunami), has been shown to be pretty shoddy. And in the aftermath of Fukushima, it has been shown clearly that they made decisions and had flaws that contributed to what their disaster become...

If that's what happens in a place like Japan, how much of a chance to you want to give Thailand of successfully pulling off a nuclear power plant... Pretty much about zilch

It's not about bashing Thailand or Thai people. It's simply taking off your rose-colored glasses and looking at the society here as it exists in fact.

Edited August 10, 2011 by jfchandler

[Tokay]

When my internet does not shut off when it slightly rains, only then I will give them a green light for building a nuclear power plant. And then I will move as far away from Thailand, upwind, as possible.

[Soutpeel]

how much of a chance to you want to give Thailand of successfully pulling off a nuclear power plant... Pretty much about zilch

It's not about bashing Thailand or Thai people. It's simply taking off your rose-colored glasses and looking at the society here as it exists in fact.

I heard similar comments over 20 years ago while working on nuclear construction in China, and the Chinese have done pretty well with their commerical nuclear program, in fact the operational safety was more impressive than some of the facilties i worked on the "land O free"......in certain facilities in the US Homer Simpson appeared to be alive and well.

As regards the rose-coloured glasses....I actually do work in heavy industry in Thailand and the standards in the industry I am in are on par with or even exceed some places I have worked in the "western world".

Granted if a farangs only exposure to "tradesmen" (and I use the term lightly) is Somchai the electrican/bricklayer building his teenage teeraks house in Isaan etc....then I can well understand where the belief comes from that everything is dysfunctional.

Yes there are "cultural" problems, yes mai pen rai is alive and well, yes there have been/are some real c*ck ups in Thailand, but is this any different from anywhere else ?

Could Thailand pull off a commerical nuclear program off and run it safely ?.....Yes, why not...they have done pretty well in heavy industry/refineries/offshore etc....a commerical nuclear program is no different.

The arguement is a bit of a moot point as the IAEC has already stated Thailand is not ready for commerical nuclear, so therefore it aint going to happen in a long while, certainly as the remarks were made pre-Japan.

So in conclusion, the vast majority of our more "senior" and vocal resident farangs in Thailand who are rabidly anti-nuclear have very little to fear from commerical nuclear in Thailand as they will be long gone before the program ever see's the light of day that much I am certain of....

[jfchandler]

Granted if a farangs only exposure to "tradesmen" (and I use the term lightly) is Somchai the electrican/bricklayer building his teenage teeraks house in Isaan etc....then I can well understand where the belief comes from that everything is dysfunctional.

Nice example, but totally off my point and examples...

Most all of those examples I cited above were/are major public projects initiated by various arms of the Thai government. Not exactly Somchai the electrician bricklayer... But obviously, it's not going to further your flawed argument to discuss or deal with the actual pertinent examples of the flawed development and operation of major public projects, similar to what any nuclear power plant would be.

[Chopperboy]

how much of a chance to you want to give Thailand of successfully pulling off a nuclear power plant... Pretty much about zilch

It's not about bashing Thailand or Thai people. It's simply taking off your rose-colored glasses and looking at the society here as it exists in fact.

I heard similar comments over 20 years ago while working on nuclear construction in China, and the Chinese have done pretty well with their commerical nuclear program, in fact the operational safety was more impressive than some of the facilties i worked on the "land O free"......in certain facilities in the US Homer Simpson appeared to be alive and well.

As regards the rose-coloured glasses....I actually do work in heavy industry in Thailand and the standards in the industry I am in are on par with or even exceed some places I have worked in the "western world".

Granted if a farangs only exposure to "tradesmen" (and I use the term lightly) is Somchai the electrican/bricklayer building his teenage teeraks house in Isaan etc....then I can well understand where the belief comes from that everything is dysfunctional.

Construction in Thailand in general even for large projects is often shoddy. Over 60 Bangkok skyscrapers built without seismic consideration "could be at risk of collapse", Recent Burapa University building collapse, Royal Plaza collapse, Delta Electronics collapse, shopping mall collapse when workers pilled up too much rubble, Scaffolding collapse at Central World Zen etc etc.

[lounger]

Given the state electrical wiring here I bet the plant:

Would not be grounded

Have twisted wire together making all the junctions.

And instead of running several big fat cables for transmission they would run 37,000 small ones

;-)

Sorry to single you out sir but your post stands out as being one of the most idiotic posts out of many similarly bad ones.FYI Generators don't work if they are not grounded. EGAT's power generation and transmission system is built and maintained to international standards. Have you ever been to a power plant in Thailand? And last but not least big fat cables comprise lots of "little ones" they are called strands. The problem in Thailand is all of the distibution systems are run over head and hence are vulnerable to trees falling on them, rats chewing the cable insulation etc. Actually MEA in Bangkok have started trying to put distribution systems underground by building cable tunnels under some of the Klongs using tunnelling techniques to avoid digging up roads but it will take decades and huge costs before it is done.

If you are going to get personal about other posters I suggest your submissions are squeeky clean, well thought out and devoid of misinterpretation.

You say EGAT build and maintain to international standards. Would those be the ones adhered to by Russia Japan and USA ( USA just missed a nuclear meltdown the other two are rather more infamous. Perhaps you have heard of them)

[Soutpeel]

Granted if a farangs only exposure to "tradesmen" (and I use the term lightly) is Somchai the electrican/bricklayer building his teenage teeraks house in Isaan etc....then I can well understand where the belief comes from that everything is dysfunctional.

Nice example, but totally off my point and examples...

Most all of those examples I cited above were/are major public projects initiated by various arms of the Thai government. Not exactly Somchai the electrician bricklayer... But obviously, it's not going to further your flawed argument to discuss or deal with the actual pertinent examples of the flawed development and operation of major public projects, similar to what any nuclear power plant would be.

But a commerical nuclear power plant would not be a "public project" per se and every example you have cited did not have international oversight in the equation which in the case of commerical nuclear is required to get the relevant operating licenses and be provided with fuel.

Further within the list provided and subsequent list so kindly provided by "Chopperboy" interesting how there is not one "industrial project on the list...it seems to me all examples relate to "commerical construction/Civil engineering projects" .....just an observation...

[jfchandler]

Map Ta Phut is one shining example of the environmental damage that private industry can create in Thailand, as well as an example of total government non-interest in any kind of meaningful environmental protection...

At least in that case, it's only leakage of poisonous gases and chemical groundwater contamination that are the main problems.... fortunately, not leaking radioactivity and radioactive contamination of the surrounding waters.

But people might well think of Map Ta Phut as the so-called minor leagues for Thailand future aspirations to join the nuclear big leagues.

[Yeppe]

Nuclear Power Plant in Mai Pen Rai Country :blink:???? The most scaring news I ever heard!! Why are they for a god´s shake planning such now that Germany and Japan are getting rid of those deadly plants?? Seems like Thai leaders are looking for the BIG BIG BIG TROUBLE....This means that Farangs are soon selling very cheaply their property away - we don´t wanna die of radiation. And no Farangs come there for holiday - you will be on your own if you really start to build them. And secondly, where are you gonna jettison the used radiating fuel? Into the Chao Praya River, maybe (I wouldn´t wonder at all )?

VERY Worried Farang.

Nuclear + a rich country = Scaring damned scaring!

Nuclear + a poor country = Oh my god - I´ll be nocking on the heaven´s door!

Edited August 10, 2011 by Yeppe

[steveromagnino]

- given that nuclear power currently doesn't usually stack up financially once the cost of disposal are factored into the DCF for 10,000 years and using an appropriate desired ROI;

- given that it is hugely capital intensive and thus ripe for skims and corruption during construction and are marketed by companies not immune to the appeal of paying such 'gifts'; given that the cost of the raw fuel is not static and may not be cost effective in the future;

- given that Thailand is heavily reliant on land and water supply for agriculture and many other industries both of which would be massively affected in a Japan/USA/Russia style problem;

- given that Thailand does not have a free and transparent deregulated energy market nor are there currently substantial incentives for improvements in power delivery and were such a market to be introduced regionally it is possible that it would not be able to compete cost effectively and that pricing and even demand/supply might change substantially in a cost reflective market;

- given that nuclear relies heavily on cooling and Thailand's peak load in the load curve is probably cooling related which means running reactors in the hottest periods when cooling water is probably so hot as to be close to unusable or at least having a substantial effect on efficient...;

- given that other energy sources remain available....it seems foolish to use nuclear when it isn't needed.

However, the purpose of all these studies is not to actually use it.

It is to provide numerous consultants with access to government funds that always come in under procurement cost controls; it is dead simple to do 50 studies of this or that, and basically give away tax payer money to connected parties.

I am not a Thai energy market expert, but I presume a nuclear plant could already come in as an IPP and sell to the grid, and yet none do. Government selecting and setting up power plants is usually the worst most idiotic customer because they make decisions like simpletons since it isn't their money. If there aren't IPPs lining up, then it probably doesn't stack up (which is fairly obvious anyhow).

Anyhow, since we love wasting money on crop pledging and other idiotic subsidies, why not just subsidise renewable energy...in fact this is one of the good things the government is ACTUALLY doing feeding into the grid starting I think in the next 12 months....nuclear if it ever happened (which it won't) will be 8 years from now and what chance do you think that a firm bidding can afford to pay out multiple governments and multiple ministers? Plus who exactly will allow this monstosity in their backyard? It makes single cycle lignite generation look good! When you consider biomass, embedded small scale generation at the end user site, solar, wind, etc etc....and huge potential energy savings nationwide....it is not a necessary evil at all. And like all power, transmission losses are a killer, so it has to be located near the eastern seaboard and Bangkok...again who would want it here?

Personally from what I've seen the IPPs and the Thai power stations run pretty well; however given Japan, USA, Russia have been unable to avoid issues...why should we think we are going to be different? It may be nothing to do with something within our locus of control...acts of god are indeed not unknown to Thailand....

Edited August 10, 2011 by steveromagnino

[witsawakorn]

Sorry to single you out sir but your post stands out as being one of the most idiotic posts out of many similarly bad ones.FYI Generators don't work if they are not grounded. EGAT's power generation and transmission system is built and maintained to international standards. Have you ever been to a power plant in Thailand? And last but not least big fat cables comprise lots of "little ones" they are called strands. The problem in Thailand is all of the distibution systems are run over head and hence are vulnerable to trees falling on them, rats chewing the cable insulation etc. Actually MEA in Bangkok have started trying to put distribution systems underground by building cable tunnels under some of the Klongs using tunnelling techniques to avoid digging up roads but it will take decades and huge costs before it is done.

First, I'd like to say thanks for the good info you've provided above re Thailand's energy activities... much appreciated...

But, as to your various responses to the posts above, you're answering them literally, while the various posters were making figurative statements all aiming to the same overarching point:

In many facets of society, Thailand has proven that it has great difficulty in properly executing major projects without significant flaws problems -- which could prove critical and potentially lethal if put in the context of a nuclear power plant.

Those have included, as some have mentioned above, endemic corruption leading to flawed planning and bidding processes; shoddy workmanship and improperly substituted parts/materials; the proven inability of government to conduct an impartial, scientifically credible environmental impact review; lack of a meaningful regulatory and environmental safety system, the proven inability of government agencies to act in the public's interest as opposed to their own political or economic interests, and more and more...

I could add a long list of illustrative examples, but some might include:

--the failure to open the On Nut Skytrain extension years beyond its scheduled date because of mismanagement

--the flawed construction of the Suvarnabhumi Airport and its crumbling runways.

--the emerging design and operational problems with the Airport Rail Link line.

--the Santika night club fire and what it showed about the lack of enforcement of safety regulations.

--the past episodes where people were injured and killed by the water slide collapse at the water park in Bangkok

--aviation safety episodes like the dual crash of F-16 fighters, the three recent Army helicopter crashes and the long-running problems with Orient Thai airline.

and more and more and more...

It's all of those kinds of examples and the others like them that make many people skeptical about Thailand's ability to safely operate a nuclear power plant.

First. Thank you for the complement. Second.I aplogise for responding literally to some posts which may not have been intended to come across as literal. It's a fault of my engineering mind. Most importantly I would like to clarify that I am in no way trying to argue that Nuclear Power Plant should be built in Thailand. IMHO the human race isn't capable of building such plant with any reasonable certainty that they won't result in a disaster as recent events . However I know that it is possible to build a billion dollar plus project on time in Thailand and with a safety record that any country would be proud of. I think that most of the project examples that you quote are government managed projects so it is clear to me that projects owned and managed by private companies are often more successful than government run projects. I believe that applies to perhaps every country. I am aware that corruption is endemic in Thailand but I think we should avoid being hypocritical in this area. Not so long ago a certain German company paid a record "fine" to the US government over their corrupt way of doing business. It wouldn't surprise me if that same company was involved in some of the lower performing projects here. There is not much incentive to perform if you buy a job is there? Anyway sorry for being pedantic but I like the LoS and dom't oten feel like jumping on the "negative" bandwagon. Until there is nothing for me to do here I'll continue doing what I can to help to get power projects here built safely, on time, on quality and hopefully pass on some of my knowledge and experience to the people that I work with and have some fun doing it. Sounds like a plan to me:-)

[jfchandler]

Thanks for that thoughtful, and fair-minded response.... Sometimes that's hard to find around here...

I'd certainly concur with your multiple views in the latest post...

It does seem that anytime the government and politicians get involved here, things tend to go south (figuratively, not literally... )

But, as regards the private sector's performance, I notice you didn't respond to the example of Map Ta Phut that I cited to another poster above... Hardly a good example of the private sector's environmental performance and track record.

However, no matter how one cuts it, the construction of a nuclear power plant anytime in Thailand future is going to be rife with government involvement (as it would be in any country), apart from whatever potential shortcomings the private sector may have.

I too have my general doubts of the ability of any country to run a successful, safe, and economical nuclear program. But in Thailand's case, I don't have "doubts," I have certainty that it can't be done -- at least not in anything vaguely resembling the current state of the country.

[jfchandler]

But to put in all down to its simplest level, I think it comes down to Thailand having a non-functional legal, regulatory and law enforcement system.

In other countries, while certainly not perfect, at least, if a big company breaks the law or violates applicable regulations, there's at least the chance or risk (depending on the country) that the company could be prosecuted or fined, and in some places, even the corporate executives prosecuted and jailed, and/or the company subjected to large, financially serious civil judgments, or even lose their government operating permits.

But in Thailand, none of those things apply to serve as a disincentive for criminal or harmful conduct, or on the flip side, as an incentive for good companies to ensure that their practices and performance are sound.

Here, if you have a legal problem, you pay some tea money or call your friendly politician and the problem disappears or is lost in the bureaucracy...or somehow the statute of limitations expires... There is no, as best as I can tell, meaningful civil liability system in the courts for damaged parties to seek meangingful reimbursement or damages, and certainly virtually nothing in the way of punitive damage awards to punish bad corporate behavior. And the various Thai government regulatory agencies have a long and well-established record of practical non-performance. Maybe some try at the local operating level, or maybe they don't. But either way, the end result typically is nothing.

Apart from the good aspects and aspirations of human nature, it's equal parts fear that keeps people and companies in line with the law... fear of the consequences that may ensure... But here in Thailand, unfortunately, we have a society where for the big players, there is absolutely no such fear.

[Soutpeel]

Nuclear Power Plant in Mai Pen Rai Country :blink:???? The most scaring news I ever heard!! Why are they for a god´s shake planning such now that Germany and Japan are getting rid of those deadly plants?? Seems like Thai leaders are looking for the BIG BIG BIG TROUBLE....This means that Farangs are soon selling very cheaply their property away - we don´t wanna die of radiation. And no Farangs come there for holiday - you will be on your own if you really start to build them. And secondly, where are you gonna jettison the used radiating fuel? Into the Chao Praya River, maybe (I wouldn´t wonder at all )?

VERY Worried Farang.

Nuclear + a rich country = Scaring damned scaring!

Nuclear + a poor country = Oh my god - I´ll be nocking on the heaven´s door!

You had better go and put your tin foil hat then....

If commerical nuclear ever comes into fruiition in Thailand (I personally dont think it will) then based on some of the rabid comments made to date on this topic, some people will have to take a hard look at their lives in Thailand ( this is not intended as one of those, if you dont like it go home comments) and consider leaving the country then, irrespective of what you think/your outrage blah blah, if they decide to build, get approval to build, they will build.

So let me pose this question ?....suppose they did build, other than standing on a soap box on TV, what you going to do about it ?

[Soutpeel]

IMHO the human race isn't capable of building such plant with any reasonable certainty that they won't result in a disaster as recent events .

But with this mind set the human race would still be hunter gather's living in caves and there would never be "progress"

Everytime an airplane falls out the sky and kills 300+ people.....do we hear people calling for the worldwide banning of air travel ?

When the Titanic sank with 1500 people on-board was there a call to ban all passenger ships/commerical shipping ?

When the most technically complex piece of equipment (the space shuttle) fell out the sky on two occasions, was use of the space shuttle banned ?

When Piper Alpha exploded killing 120+ was there a call to ban oil & gas

and more recently the Gulf of Mexico where was the call to shut down all O&G production ?

The sad thing is for safety standards to improve, there generally needs to be an "accident....sad but true

Lets suppose Thailand started a commerical nuclear program and they could supply power to the comsumer for say THB 5 kw//h ,and then lets suppose they could also supply "green" alternatives at THB 20 kw/h.

We all know what the vast majority of farangs in Thailand would choose dont we...?....

[fritter1970]

*** Situation 1 ***

Thaksin rips-off Thailand by allowing himself not to pay taxes

Mai Pen Rai

*** Situation 2 ***

(Politically connected) construction company poorly constructs NUCLEAR power plant

Powerplant has meltdown

Mai Pen Rai

*** Situation 3 ***

Why should Thailand not be able to operate NUCLEAR power plants?

Mai Pen Rai

[Gonsalviz]

Thank someone, maybe God or Christ or Abraham or Mahammad. Now we can all continue to breathe the Bangkok black dust with relative ease.

You should have been around 20 years ago. BKK is clean now.

[Chopperboy]

Granted if a farangs only exposure to "tradesmen" (and I use the term lightly) is Somchai the electrican/bricklayer building his teenage teeraks house in Isaan etc....then I can well understand where the belief comes from that everything is dysfunctional.

Nice example, but totally off my point and examples...

Most all of those examples I cited above were/are major public projects initiated by various arms of the Thai government. Not exactly Somchai the electrician bricklayer... But obviously, it's not going to further your flawed argument to discuss or deal with the actual pertinent examples of the flawed development and operation of major public projects, similar to what any nuclear power plant would be.

But a commerical nuclear power plant would not be a "public project" per se and every example you have cited did not have international oversight in the equation which in the case of commerical nuclear is required to get the relevant operating licenses and be provided with fuel.

Further within the list provided and subsequent list so kindly provided by "Chopperboy" interesting how there is not one "industrial project on the list...it seems to me all examples relate to "commerical construction/Civil engineering projects" .....just an observation...

International oversight like the IAEA you mean?

The IAEA acts unashamedly as the nuclear industries sales force.

Promoting the nuclear industry is their mission - not to protect people or the environment.

[wintermute]

Construction in Thailand in general even for large projects is often shoddy. Over 60 Bangkok skyscrapers built without seismic consideration "could be at risk of collapse", Recent Burapa University building collapse, Royal Plaza collapse, Delta Electronics collapse, shopping mall collapse when workers pilled up too much rubble, Scaffolding collapse at Central World Zen etc etc.

This isn't because of incompetence though but because of greed. The incentive for building shoddy temporary hi-so looking "pretty" buildings is all economic. They know these buildings won't last and they are banking on their degradation so they can throw up a new set of buildings with massive kickbacks involved when the old ones reach their predicted end of its lifespan. On top of that i'm sure the associated political/business elite's construction companies probably own maintenance, security, and furnishings company subsidiaries which profit greatly from maintaining these gaudy new glass deathtraps.

Plus labor and human life is so cheap in SE Asia that compensation for big accidents is a pittance. Insurance is a joke because a lot of the robber barons also own large majorities in the insurance companies so one hand washes the other as it has always been and always will be in this region.

On the other hand a nuclear power plant in Thailand sounds scary but it's doable because a nuke disaster would wreck all the domestic Thai monopolist's economic plans. So they would do well to make sure security and regulations are being kept in check by the government. Matter of fact they would be especially vigilant because a disaster on the Japanese scale would wipe out Thailand's economy.

Edited August 12, 2011 by wintermute

[Soutpeel]

International oversight like the IAEA you mean?

The IAEA acts unashamedly as the nuclear industries sales force.

Promoting the nuclear industry is their mission - not to protect people or the environment.

If everything you say is true, why have the IAEA stated publicly, they dont believe Thailand is ready for commerical nuclear ?

If what you is true, they would be here already trying to get the contracts signed....

[witsawakorn]

In many facets of society, Thailand has proven that it has great difficulty in properly executing major projects without significant flaws problems -- which could prove critical and potentially lethal if put in the context of a nuclear power plant.

Those have included, as some have mentioned above, endemic corruption leading to flawed planning and bidding processes; shoddy workmanship and improperly substituted parts/materials; the proven inability of government to conduct an impartial, scientifically credible environmental impact review; lack of a meaningful regulatory and environmental safety system, the proven inability of government agencies to act in the public's interest as opposed to their own political or economic interests, and more and more...

I could add a long list of illustrative examples, but some might include:

--the failure to open the On Nut Skytrain extension years beyond its scheduled date because of mismanagement

--the flawed construction of the Suvarnabhumi Airport and its crumbling runways.

--the emerging design and operational problems with the Airport Rail Link line.

--the Santika night club fire and what it showed about the lack of enforcement of safety regulations.

--the past episodes where people were injured and killed by the water slide collapse at the water park in Bangkok

--aviation safety episodes like the dual crash of F-16 fighters, the three recent Army helicopter crashes and the long-running problems with Orient Thai airline.

and more and more and more...

It's all of those kinds of examples and the others like them that make many people skeptical about Thailand's ability to safely operate a nuclear power plant.

So what you are suggesting is things like this only happen in Thailand ?.......Nowhere in the Europe, "Land of the free" or anywhere else in the "Western world" has there been a serious accident/fire/mismangement/corrution reported ?....... .....WOW you must live in a different reality to me, so you obviously dont remember the offshore fire/explosion/fatalities occuring in the "Land O the free" (Gulf of Mexico) not more than a few months ago....and it may interest you to know there was not a Thai national involved in this...

Good point and regarding the recent aircrashes it was interesting to note that one of the choppers that went down was a reconditioned ex USAF helo. A few years back an ex military C-130 was leased by the US government off a private company for use as a water bomber to fight forest fires. whilst firefighting the wings fell off due to structural failure. A big scandal relating to corruption in the US It seems that some of these ex military aircraft used by the Forestry Service were also used for Black Ops by certain agencies and such uses were not relected in the plane's log books consequently inspections/maintenance didn't reflect the planes' usage. Google Gary Eitel (the whistleblower) for some very interesting reading about corruption in the Forestry Service. I wonder where the RTAF bought the recon helo from and did the log relect it's previous use?

[Crushdepth]

IMHO the human race isn't capable of building such plant with any reasonable certainty that they won't result in a disaster as recent events .

But with this mind set the human race would still be hunter gather's living in caves and there would never be "progress"

Everytime an airplane falls out the sky and kills 300+ people.....do we hear people calling for the worldwide banning of air travel ?

When the Titanic sank with 1500 people on-board was there a call to ban all passenger ships/commerical shipping ?

When the most technically complex piece of equipment (the space shuttle) fell out the sky on two occasions, was use of the space shuttle banned ?

When Piper Alpha exploded killing 120+ was there a call to ban oil & gas

and more recently the Gulf of Mexico where was the call to shut down all O&G production ?

The sad thing is for safety standards to improve, there generally needs to be an "accident....sad but true

Lets suppose Thailand started a commerical nuclear program and they could supply power to the comsumer for say THB 5 kw//h ,and then lets suppose they could also supply "green" alternatives at THB 20 kw/h.

We all know what the vast majority of farangs in Thailand would choose dont we...?....

"The sad thing is for safety standards to improve, there generally needs to be an "accident....sad but true"

Yeah but we're talking about a NUCLEAR accident here. The mess is not quite so easy to clean up.

[Soutpeel]

IMHO the human race isn't capable of building such plant with any reasonable certainty that they won't result in a disaster as recent events .

But with this mind set the human race would still be hunter gather's living in caves and there would never be "progress"

Everytime an airplane falls out the sky and kills 300+ people.....do we hear people calling for the worldwide banning of air travel ?

When the Titanic sank with 1500 people on-board was there a call to ban all passenger ships/commerical shipping ?

When the most technically complex piece of equipment (the space shuttle) fell out the sky on two occasions, was use of the space shuttle banned ?

When Piper Alpha exploded killing 120+ was there a call to ban oil & gas

and more recently the Gulf of Mexico where was the call to shut down all O&G production ?

The sad thing is for safety standards to improve, there generally needs to be an "accident....sad but true

Lets suppose Thailand started a commerical nuclear program and they could supply power to the comsumer for say THB 5 kw//h ,and then lets suppose they could also supply "green" alternatives at THB 20 kw/h.

We all know what the vast majority of farangs in Thailand would choose dont we...?....

"The sad thing is for safety standards to improve, there generally needs to be an "accident....sad but true"

Yeah but we're talking about a NUCLEAR accident here. The mess is not quite so easy to clean up.

Well the Japanese managed to get Nagasaki and Hiroshima "cleaned up" after the Yanks dropped two nukes on them.....

[Chopperboy]

IMHO the human race isn't capable of building such plant with any reasonable certainty that they won't result in a disaster as recent events .

But with this mind set the human race would still be hunter gather's living in caves and there would never be "progress"

Everytime an airplane falls out the sky and kills 300+ people.....do we hear people calling for the worldwide banning of air travel ?

When the Titanic sank with 1500 people on-board was there a call to ban all passenger ships/commerical shipping ?

When the most technically complex piece of equipment (the space shuttle) fell out the sky on two occasions, was use of the space shuttle banned ?

When Piper Alpha exploded killing 120+ was there a call to ban oil & gas

and more recently the Gulf of Mexico where was the call to shut down all O&G production ?

The sad thing is for safety standards to improve, there generally needs to be an "accident....sad but true

Lets suppose Thailand started a commerical nuclear program and they could supply power to the comsumer for say THB 5 kw//h ,and then lets suppose they could also supply "green" alternatives at THB 20 kw/h.

We all know what the vast majority of farangs in Thailand would choose dont we...?....

"The sad thing is for safety standards to improve, there generally needs to be an "accident....sad but true"

Yeah but we're talking about a NUCLEAR accident here. The mess is not quite so easy to clean up.

Well the Japanese managed to get Nagasaki and Hiroshima "cleaned up" after the Yanks dropped two nukes on them.....

Nuclear bombs use a much less dangerous form of plutonium to ensure safe handling of the weapon. Bombs also don't contain the other more dangerous radioactive isotopes that a nuclear reactor produces. So in short, a nuclear reactors used fuel is vastly more dangerous (in terms of radiation) than that of a nuclear bomb.

[Chopperboy]

International oversight like the IAEA you mean?

The IAEA acts unashamedly as the nuclear industries sales force.

Promoting the nuclear industry is their mission - not to protect people or the environment.

If everything you say is true, why have the IAEA stated publicly, they dont believe Thailand is ready for commerical nuclear ?

If what you is true, they would be here already trying to get the contracts signed....

Because even they know how embarrassing it could get!!

Fukushima has been a huge setback and embarrassment for the whole industry.