3 ms·
Actually it is unreasonable to expect fivefold increase. Unless the production will grow using 40years old reactors. If you consider environmental records of th
by rimliu 10y ago
Actually it is unreasonable to expect fivefold increase. Unless the production will grow using 40years old reactors.
If you consider environmental records of the nuclear power poor what can you say about other types of power plants which have even poorer record?
- varjag 10y agoIt is entirely reasonable to expect that operation in places like (hypothetical) Venezuela, Pakistan or Jordan would be more accident-prone. And that's not accounting for very substantial chance of the sites ending up in warzones. For example, in my native Belarus on a new plant project they dinged the reactor vessel in installation a couple of times already. Three workers have died in process of construction so far. Can't say I'm looking forward to its operation. > If you consider environmental records of the nuclear power poor what can you say about other types of power plants which have even poorer record? I say even coal does not have as long lasting effect when replaced by cleaner tech (e.g. natural gas) as a nuclear fallout site.
- rimliu 10y agoOh we (Lithuania) are well aware of the new construction in Belarus and because it is close to the border and our capital we are not happy about it either. Coal spreads much more radiation compared to nuclear power plants.
- Retric 10y agoPeople don't have linear responses to radiation. To simplify if you need 3 mutations in a specific order to cause cancer, if each events as 1/10,000 you get (1/10,000)^3 but if you go to (1/1,000)^3 it's not 10x as dangerous but 1,000x as dangerous.