From the SeattleTimes.com article:
"The Trojan Nuclear Plant's cooling tower took a year to build and cost more than $10 million. It came down in about 10 seconds Sunday morning...
The cooling tower, which was part of Oregon's only nuclear-power plant, started producing power amid controversy in 1976 and at one point could have powered all of Portland on its own.
But the power plant worked for only 3,300 days. It was shut down temporarily twice in 1978 when majority owner Portland General Electric (PGE) discovered it was atop an earthquake fault and again in 1980 when cracks in the steam tubes were discovered. It closed permanently in 1992 because of radioactive leaks."
I'm a big fan of nuclear power - in certain situations. I see it as a bit like flying in an airplane: when they crash, it's a worldwide story, but, as Superman says, it's still the safest way to travel. At some point, the world's fossil fuels will either be used up or hoarded to the point of impossibility, so the future will be all about electric cars and massive amounts of cheap electricity to run them. With solar and wind-turbine power still not worth the expense, that leaves nuclear power as a cheap, cost-effective solution.
HOWEVER: That doesn't mean that we should set them up, willy-nilly, outside every small town in America. The Trojan Nuclear Plant was just outside Vancouver, right on the shores of the Columbia River, a constant eyesore for the thousands of people driving on I-5 every day. Nuclear energy to power Portland? Good idea. Setting it up where it is? Not so much.
I'm no expert, and in fact I welcome any comments below from anyone who has more information or experience in the area, but it seems to me that the best place to set up these plants is in the middle of nowhere: the deserts of the Southwest, perhaps - nowhere near large cities, natural wildlife, tourism or geological fault lines. As technology keeps getting better, you would think that a handful of these plants, providing massive amounts of energy, would be better for the environment than continuing to burn oil/gas/coal/whatever.
But what to do with the waste? With NASA getting ready to launch another space shuttle, my father and I kicked around the idea of routinely launching the nuclear byproducts into space and setting large containers of them on collision courses with the sun.
Again - I am no expert. I am merely an uninformed opinion generator. The big question is: What do YOU think?
Read all about it: