3 ms·

The problem with nuclear power is not the techniques. The problem is the human part. At some point, some director of manager wants to save money, which can ofte

The problem with nuclear power is not the techniques. The problem is the human part. At some point, some director of manager wants to save money, which can often be at the expense of safety. If you look at all indicents in nuclear reactor, one of the causes is often not having the money or the desire to safe some money. Nuclear power is not a toy, and every expense should be made so that it is safe. You can't always prevent evidence, but with something so risky as nuclear power, having an indicent where money is (one of) the causes is just really stupid.

JumpCrisscross 8y ago
> At some point, some director of manager wants to save money, which can often be at the expense of safety. This is true in any system. The downsides with nuclear don't seem to be as grave as the downsides that come with fossil fuels. (On a kilowatt-hour adjusted basis, at least.) > having an indicent where money is (one of) the causes is just really stupid Money is always a factor. Money represents resources. Finite resources. No problem can be worth infinity because we don't have infinity to play with.
- eurleif 8y ago
  I'll bet you could get California to vote for a ballot measure banning all finite things with a little work.
  - qbrass 8y ago
    Finite things contain chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm.
klondike_ 8y ago
It is impossible for modern nuclear reactors to fail like Chernobyl. In the worst case scenario, the damage would be negligible and the reactor would shut itself down.