"Just in case you missed this article I wanted to forward it to you."

"It is one week old, but shows that even in the Guardian some commentators interpret the disaster as positive for nuclear energy. As always thanks for the wonderful service."

And:

"BBC News World is worth a look ( 28/3/11). See Viewpoint by Wade Allison on Radiation."

David Fuller's view Once again I have occasion to express my gratitude to subscribers, who driven by their analytical curiosity, sift through the mundane and repetitious in pursuit of excellent research reports and articles, which they then forward in the spirit of Empowerment Through Knowledge, so that it can be shared with the Collective of Subscribers.

These are two very good articles, which I commend to you even though both have underestimated the radiation leakage at Fukushima. While these elderly reactors were certainly built to last, from the day they were hit by the almost unimaginable force of the 5th largest earthquake in recorded history, quickly followed by a devastating tsunami, there has been little hard evidence to date that the crisis has been contained.

Is this good reason for reversing the expansion of nuclear power? I certainly do not think so because the overall safety record compares favourably with all other significant sources of electricity. Nuclear contributes approximately 14% of global electricity and far fewer people have been killed in the mining, refining and usage of uranium for nuclear power than can be said for coal, crude oil and its derivative products, or natural gas.

I certainly do not think so but I have seen people express their fear of cancer from nuclear radiation but not the dozen or more cigarettes which they smoke every day. Perhaps it has to do with choice. The vastly greater risk of dying from tobacco or alcohol related illness, or an automobile accident feels less menacing because they have chosen to take that risk.

As a funding operation and PR exercise, perhaps governments should encourage nuclear power stations to upgrade their public image by opening singles bars, nightclubs and casinos on their sites. The drinks and games could be given dangerous nuclear names (suggestions welcomed) to enhance their appeal. Revellers could party all night without risk of disturbing people in residential areas.

Eoin adds: Discos at nuclear power stations would give those fluorescent sticks people bring to clubs a whole new connotation.