I'm really annoyed at all the people who, seeing the nuclear mess unfolding in Japan, jump onto the pseudo-green anti-nuclear bandwagon. It's pure hypocrisy.
Yes, there are dangers with nuclear power – and some of them are truly terrifying. But let's make a parallel. There are dangers in travelling by airplane, too. They are truly terrifying. But statistically, airplane travel is one of the safest we have. It's just that when accidents happen, they are catastrophic in nature. Likewise, nuclear power's failures tend to be catastrophic, but statistically, it's much safer than most carbon-based energy sources – meaning that adding up things like respiratory illnesses, mining accidents, and, of course, global warming, carbon-based energy is much worse for human health and the human environment, but it's much more rarely catastrophic. Making an SAT-style analogy: carbon-based energy is to nuclear energy what automobile travel is to airplane travel. More catastrophic, but safer.
Get it? Stick to facts. Human fear is irrational. Don't let it rule you.
I'm far from saying I'm an unconditional defender of nuclear power. But I will only say, I'd rather ban carbon than nuclear, in the world-of-today. And since realistically, politically, that's not going to happen, that means, in my desire to avoid hypocrisy, I'm driven to the strictly rational position that since nuclear is less dangerous than carbon, and since carbon is un-bannable, then therefore nuclear's risks must be socially acceptable.
To argue otherwise is irrational hypocrisy.