4 ms·

I don't have anything new to say about TMI/PBR/PBM, etc., however this sentence stands out: "You'd need a long cascade of extremely unlikely events in order fo

by rsync 11y ago

I don't have anything new to say about TMI/PBR/PBM, etc., however this sentence stands out: "You'd need a long cascade of extremely unlikely events in order for it to dangerously fail" Have we learned nothing at all ? Even when given extremely relevant and instructive examples within the last 10 years ? From Fukushima to Lehman Brothers, we continue to be shown that these unlikely events are highly correlated - even if they are extremely unlikely individually. The Tsunami comes with the Earthquake

zamalek 11y ago
> Fukushima With Fukushima they knew what the problems were and chose to make an half-assed attempt at safety - for example: the 2008 Tsunami study was ignored. I guess what could be surmised is that nuclear power is only completely safe in the absence of human nature. Which makes you correct in a round-about way. However, it is unsafe in comparison to what? Nine times out of ten not being able to breath anywhere on the planet, forever, seems like the more dangerous prospect; versus making a specific piece of land uninhabitable for a few thousand years. Nuclear waste is far easier to see, which makes us more aware of it and hence our monkey brains believe it is more dangerous ("smoke just dissolves into the air!"). I can't think of any power solution that doesn't have severe drawbacks; however, nuclear is at the very least not the top contender in that list.
- smileysteve 11y ago
  > However, it is unsafe in comparison to what? Nine times out of ten not being able to breath anywhere on the planet, forever, seems like the more dangerous prospect; The arsenic and other emissions from a coal plant are roughly measurable to a nuclear MELTDOWN every 10 years.
  - zamalek 11y ago
    ... and because of the current anti-nuclear sentiment, when South Africa faced a power crisis they decided to build the biggest coal power plant in the southern hemisphere[1]. I honestly can in no small way whatsoever see that as a win for the environment. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medupi_Power_Station https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medupi_Power_Station Thanks for that factoid.
mikeash 11y ago
Don't put your emergency equipment in the basement when you're building in a flood zone. I don't think Fukushima really needed, or experienced, a long cascade of extremely unlikely events. It was just badly designed, then experienced a not-particularly-unlikely event.

by rsync 11y ago

zamalek 11y ago

> Fukushima With Fukushima they knew what the problems were and chose to make an half-assed attempt at safety - for example: the 2008 Tsunami study was ignored. I guess what could be surmised is that nuclear power is only completely safe in the absence of human nature. Which makes you correct in a round-about way. However, it is unsafe in comparison to what? Nine times out of ten not being able to breath anywhere on the planet, forever, seems like the more dangerous prospect; versus making a specific piece of land uninhabitable for a few thousand years. Nuclear waste is far easier to see, which makes us more aware of it and hence our monkey brains believe it is more dangerous ("smoke just dissolves into the air!"). I can't think of any power solution that doesn't have severe drawbacks; however, nuclear is at the very least not the top contender in that list.

smileysteve 11y ago
> However, it is unsafe in comparison to what? Nine times out of ten not being able to breath anywhere on the planet, forever, seems like the more dangerous prospect; The arsenic and other emissions from a coal plant are roughly measurable to a nuclear MELTDOWN every 10 years.
- zamalek 11y ago
  ... and because of the current anti-nuclear sentiment, when South Africa faced a power crisis they decided to build the biggest coal power plant in the southern hemisphere[1]. I honestly can in no small way whatsoever see that as a win for the environment. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medupi_Power_Station https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medupi_Power_Station Thanks for that factoid.

mikeash 11y ago

Don't put your emergency equipment in the basement when you're building in a flood zone. I don't think Fukushima really needed, or experienced, a long cascade of extremely unlikely events. It was just badly designed, then experienced a not-particularly-unlikely event.