4 ms·

Nuclear failures are different - they make an entire area uninhabitable for hundreds of years and they're very difficult to clean up without getting a lot of pe

Nuclear failures are different - they make an entire area uninhabitable for hundreds of years and they're very difficult to clean up without getting a lot of people killed.

ThomPete 8y ago
Making a small area uninhabitable vs killing millions a year, i know where i take my chances. Chernobyl killed almost no one, fukushima killed almost no one. Mother nature kill more people in a day than have died from all nuclear disasters together. You really have the proportions wrong in such a fundamental way, unfortunately supported by media, politicians and environmentalist.
- adetrest 8y ago
  Chernobyl killed a lot of people. Even today, more people than ever get thyroid cancer and disorders thanks to Chernobyl. While very few people were killed by the explosion itself, millions were affected and died from the event's consequences.
  - ThomPete 8y ago
    No it didnt kill a lot and i would urge you to find that evidence. Furthermore the amount of people who died from chernobyl in all the time after is a fraction of the people who dies of natural phenomena from nature every year, add on top of that the other reasons people die and chernobyl is not even worth mentioning. Again you guys have your proportions completely wrong at a fundamental level.
    - lowry 8y ago
      IIRC, the number of direct deaths was around 100, including a helicopter crew that crashed on site a few days later.
  - jabl 8y ago
    The consensus view as reported by WHO estimates around 4000 in total will eventually die due to Chernobyl. Not millions.
WalterBright 8y ago
Coal mining makes large areas uninhabitable. Chernobyl and Fukishima made areas uninhabitable for humans, but they seem to be gardens for flora and fauna (because people aren't bothering them).
roenxi 8y ago
I have a favorite article for when people say that - https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-35761136 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-35761136 - which notes that there are areas inside the Fukushima exclusion zone with an additional annual dose of 13 millisieverts vs city of Ramsar in Iran where they have an annual dose of 250 millisieverts. The citizens of Ramsar obviously have found the place to be inhabitable although I'm sure some safety expert is working to kick them out of their homes too.
WalterBright 8y ago
Just today on HackerNews: "An Epidemic Is Killing Thousands of Coal Miners" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18712022 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18712022
- fossuser 8y ago
  Coal isn't great either (worse in a lot of ways), but the type of risk is different. I just find it odd that Nuclear seems to create these almost religious followers like the parent comment I replied to that ignore the tradeoffs and special risks of Nuclear failures. Wind and solar seem a lot more preferable and are getting better with battery improvements leading to increased capacity with a lower cost.
  - WalterBright 8y ago
    > the type of risk is different Humans seem to be wildly irrational in their acceptance/rejection of different types of risks that has little to do with the odds of the risk.
  - ThomPete 8y ago
    You should find any evidence of your own position before you start calling other people religious. The risk of nuclear is not even comparable to the risk of things you do everyday and take for granted are not worth worrying about. Find the evidence that show nuclear is even a fraction as dangerous as you claim. Dont take my worth for it, educate yourself. Then come back with the evidence and i will rally up behind you. Wind and solar are not even close to being able to deliver like nuclear and they deliver a fraction of the worlds need (1%). More people die from setting up solar and wind, way more animals die because of wind, both wind and solar pollute more. Its pretty obvious who is the religious person here.
- kazinator 8y ago
  Underground coal fire that's been burning since 1962: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centralia_mine_fire https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centralia_mine_fire The area above is not inhabitable.

Nuclear failures are different - they make an entire area uninhabitable for hundreds of years and they're very difficult to clean up without getting a lot of people killed.

ThomPete 8y ago

Making a small area uninhabitable vs killing millions a year, i know where i take my chances. Chernobyl killed almost no one, fukushima killed almost no one. Mother nature kill more people in a day than have died from all nuclear disasters together. You really have the proportions wrong in such a fundamental way, unfortunately supported by media, politicians and environmentalist.

adetrest 8y ago
Chernobyl killed a lot of people. Even today, more people than ever get thyroid cancer and disorders thanks to Chernobyl. While very few people were killed by the explosion itself, millions were affected and died from the event's consequences.
- ThomPete 8y ago
  No it didnt kill a lot and i would urge you to find that evidence. Furthermore the amount of people who died from chernobyl in all the time after is a fraction of the people who dies of natural phenomena from nature every year, add on top of that the other reasons people die and chernobyl is not even worth mentioning. Again you guys have your proportions completely wrong at a fundamental level.
  - lowry 8y ago
    IIRC, the number of direct deaths was around 100, including a helicopter crew that crashed on site a few days later.
- jabl 8y ago
  The consensus view as reported by WHO estimates around 4000 in total will eventually die due to Chernobyl. Not millions.

WalterBright 8y ago

Coal mining makes large areas uninhabitable. Chernobyl and Fukishima made areas uninhabitable for humans, but they seem to be gardens for flora and fauna (because people aren't bothering them).

roenxi 8y ago

I have a favorite article for when people say that - https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-35761136 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-35761136 - which notes that there are areas inside the Fukushima exclusion zone with an additional annual dose of 13 millisieverts vs city of Ramsar in Iran where they have an annual dose of 250 millisieverts. The citizens of Ramsar obviously have found the place to be inhabitable although I'm sure some safety expert is working to kick them out of their homes too.

WalterBright 8y ago

Just today on HackerNews: "An Epidemic Is Killing Thousands of Coal Miners" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18712022 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18712022

fossuser 8y ago
Coal isn't great either (worse in a lot of ways), but the type of risk is different. I just find it odd that Nuclear seems to create these almost religious followers like the parent comment I replied to that ignore the tradeoffs and special risks of Nuclear failures. Wind and solar seem a lot more preferable and are getting better with battery improvements leading to increased capacity with a lower cost.
- WalterBright 8y ago
  > the type of risk is different Humans seem to be wildly irrational in their acceptance/rejection of different types of risks that has little to do with the odds of the risk.
- ThomPete 8y ago
  You should find any evidence of your own position before you start calling other people religious. The risk of nuclear is not even comparable to the risk of things you do everyday and take for granted are not worth worrying about. Find the evidence that show nuclear is even a fraction as dangerous as you claim. Dont take my worth for it, educate yourself. Then come back with the evidence and i will rally up behind you. Wind and solar are not even close to being able to deliver like nuclear and they deliver a fraction of the worlds need (1%). More people die from setting up solar and wind, way more animals die because of wind, both wind and solar pollute more. Its pretty obvious who is the religious person here.
kazinator 8y ago
Underground coal fire that's been burning since 1962: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centralia_mine_fire https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centralia_mine_fire The area above is not inhabitable.