I know how safe they haven’t been - so that’s something.
I know environmental regulations mean nothing anymore and safety costs a lot of money. And profit is always the aim.
I’m sure it’s decades ahead of what was tried in the 70s and 80s. I’m sure it’s light years over coal and gas. And yet, I’m hesitant.
Can we just have renewables please? Look- other people got ‘em all over now. Wind, solar, wave, geothermal, battery types and capacities improving all the time. Ffs this was what it was it was supposed to be the whole time.
You can probably name every major nuclear accident or incident that’s ever happened. Not because they were all major catastrophes that caused mass loss of life. But because they happen so infrequently and blown out of proportion.
Fukashima was the worst accident in the last 30 years with 0 fatalities.
In the US alone over 100 people died due to wind turbines from things like falling ice or structural integrity failure. None of those people worked on turbines and happened to be bystanders to the incident.
Things like fossil fuels have thousands of deaths. But you’re trying to say nuclear is dangerous?
There is at least one fatality. Reported in 2018, a worker has died from a lung cancer. 2400 people died during the evacuation.
The number of deaths in these “accidents” is minimized, partly due to a lack of transparency and government interests, and partly because it is often difficult to establish causal links.
Finally, the calculation models are outdated and rely on datas from Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings.
Compare what you think you know with the reality of how nuclear power is used all over the world and safely.
Even Fukushima wasn’t that bad in terms of human casualties. It was the tsunami that caused all the loss of life and damage.
Not to say that the Fukushima nuclear incident wasn’t a disaster. But there were no direct deaths from it, and as far as anyone knows, no one has died of even indirect causes.
And there are a LOT of operating nuclear plants all over the world.
Edit: nuclear power generation has the 2nd least amount of deaths attributed to it out of all energy sources, beaten only by solar and only by a small margin.
Ok, how safe haven’t they been? How many were worse than deepwater horizon?
I’m guessing you’ve happily consumed what was given to you on a spoon and accepted that it was representative of the bigger picture.
I grew up an hour from a 1GW reactor that got shut down in part due to “concerned citizens” like yourself. The site it stood on is still periodically checked by the DOE but is now a recreational area. How often do old coal plants do that?
I know how safe they haven’t been - so that’s something.
I know environmental regulations mean nothing anymore and safety costs a lot of money. And profit is always the aim.
I’m sure it’s decades ahead of what was tried in the 70s and 80s. I’m sure it’s light years over coal and gas. And yet, I’m hesitant.
Can we just have renewables please? Look- other people got ‘em all over now. Wind, solar, wave, geothermal, battery types and capacities improving all the time. Ffs this was what it was it was supposed to be the whole time.
You can probably name every major nuclear accident or incident that’s ever happened. Not because they were all major catastrophes that caused mass loss of life. But because they happen so infrequently and blown out of proportion.
Fukashima was the worst accident in the last 30 years with 0 fatalities. In the US alone over 100 people died due to wind turbines from things like falling ice or structural integrity failure. None of those people worked on turbines and happened to be bystanders to the incident.
Things like fossil fuels have thousands of deaths. But you’re trying to say nuclear is dangerous?
There is at least one fatality. Reported in 2018, a worker has died from a lung cancer. 2400 people died during the evacuation.
The number of deaths in these “accidents” is minimized, partly due to a lack of transparency and government interests, and partly because it is often difficult to establish causal links. Finally, the calculation models are outdated and rely on datas from Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings.
No, you really don’t.
Compare what you think you know with the reality of how nuclear power is used all over the world and safely.
Even Fukushima wasn’t that bad in terms of human casualties. It was the tsunami that caused all the loss of life and damage.
Not to say that the Fukushima nuclear incident wasn’t a disaster. But there were no direct deaths from it, and as far as anyone knows, no one has died of even indirect causes.
And there are a LOT of operating nuclear plants all over the world.
Edit: nuclear power generation has the 2nd least amount of deaths attributed to it out of all energy sources, beaten only by solar and only by a small margin.
do you? Nuclear, Solar, and Wind are all roughly equally safe.
https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy
Ok, how safe haven’t they been? How many were worse than deepwater horizon?
I’m guessing you’ve happily consumed what was given to you on a spoon and accepted that it was representative of the bigger picture.
I grew up an hour from a 1GW reactor that got shut down in part due to “concerned citizens” like yourself. The site it stood on is still periodically checked by the DOE but is now a recreational area. How often do old coal plants do that?
Hydropower causes more deaths than nuclear reactors
sauce
Edit: sorry, changed the link because I had copied the wrong one. New one is not AI slop, I apologize
the website appears to be an ai slop farm
And those windmills are probably chopping up squirrel suit base jumpers on like a daily basis now too.
Yeah I could see that. But it’s not a particularly strong argument for nuclear. Just a strong argument against terraforming.