I FIND Albert Chan's letter headlined, ''Can't compare with Chernobyl'' just as less reassuring as those many comforting statements made by the numerous public figures over the years. The conclusion is inevitably the same - the Daya Bay plant is safe. I have no doubt that Daya Bay is safe by design. But human error is the real danger. Mr Chan inferred that both Chernobyl and Three Mile Island were inadequately designed to contain the respective types of accident, but neglected to mention the causes which I recall were man-made errors.
Tragic accidents in air, sea, and land, causes of which could be attributed to human errors, have made frequent news in China. It does appear to the Hong Kong people that mainland Chinese have a different or lesser sense of the value of life.
Thus the Hong Kong people do have a reason to be anxious because due to the geographical limitations, there is still no evacuation plan for the six million inhabitants in case of an off-site accident. Without an evacuation plan, notification to Hong Kongof an off-site accident is just an announcement of what will kill us. It is meaningless. To soothe such anxiety, the emphasis on the promotion of the safety of the Daya Bay plant should be put on the assurance of the prevention of human error instead of the plant design. Every one assumes that a nuclear plant is safe by design, otherwise, why is it built? T. YUEN Pokfulam