3 ms·
Nuclear power is dead for economic reasons. Yes, I know, engineers are somewhat insulted by the public's refusal to accept their risk modelling. That's why thi
by matt4077 8y ago
Nuclear power is dead for economic reasons.
Yes, I know, engineers are somewhat insulted by the public's refusal to accept their risk modelling. That's why this has become somewhat of a cultural fight. It sometimes feels like there's a segment of armchair scientists, forever stuck in the science-fiction of the 50s, and not noticing that the real world has long since moved on, to something far better than their vision of a nuclear-powered vacuum cleaner for every happy wife.
Even if you somehow manage to change the perception (which is unlikely, considering you probably wouldn't even accept "perception" as anything real worthy of consideration), it doesn't matter: Actual scientists have long moved on and, with a lot of help of forward-thinking politicians, invested into wind, battery, and solar technology, making it cost-competitive with even coal today.
- starbeast 8y ago>Nuclear power is dead for economic reasons. I'd say that BNFL killed itself through dishonesty. They may have had a viable business otherwise. https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199798/cmselect/cmtrdind/568/56814.htm https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199798/cmselect/cmtr... https://www.wired.com/2000/02/uk-nuclear-fuel-scandal-widens/ https://www.wired.com/2000/02/uk-nuclear-fuel-scandal-widens... https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/sellafield-crisis-deepens-as-japan-signals-the-end-of-bnfl-contract-284454.html https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/sellafield-crisis-... https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/bnfl-to-be-wound-up-by-end-of-2007-hscnft2l97g https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/bnfl-to-be-wound-up-by-en...
- sjwright 8y agoNuclear power is dead because nuclear weapons and because we don't teach most kids basic physics. (I was taught the basics of nuclear physics in high school, but that was an elective, not a required course.) As a species we are programmed to fear the unknown.
- starbeast 8y ago>As a species we are programmed to fear the unknown. Looking about the place, this seems unlikely.
- sjwright 8y agoCorrect, we have done a remarkable job of educating ourselves to defy our genetic programming.
- starbeast 8y agoOk, now explain cats.
- sjwright 8y agoArtificial selection.
- starbeast 8y agoWe are now miles off the topic, but curiosity got the better of me (or did it?) so I thought I would check the research... >"The domestication of cats took a different trajectory. Wildcats are improbable candidates for domestication (see Table 3). Like all felids, wildcats are obligate carnivores, meaning they have a limited metabolic ability to digest anything except proteins (33). Cats live a solitary existence and defend exclusive territories (making them more attached to places than to people). Furthermore, cats do not perform directed tasks and their actual utility is debatable, even as mousers (34). [In this latter role, terrier dogs and the ferret (a domesticated polecat) are more suitable.] Accordingly, there is little reason to believe an early agricultural community would have actively sought out and selected the wildcat as a house pet. Rather, the best inference is that wildcats exploiting human environments were simply tolerated by people and, over time and space, they gradually diverged from their “wild” relatives (35, 36). Thus, whereas adaptation in barnyard animals and dogs to human dominion was largely driven by artificial selection, the original domestic cat was a product of natural selection." - From wild animals to domestic pets, an evolutionary view of domestication https://www.pnas.org/content/106/Supplement_1/9971 https://www.pnas.org/content/106/Supplement_1/9971