3 ms·

Old? Unlocking the energy of the nucleus is certainly our most recent energy resource, by any measure. Dangerous? Even though nuclear fails catastrophically, i

Old? Unlocking the energy of the nucleus is certainly our most recent energy resource, by any measure. Dangerous? Even though nuclear fails catastrophically, it does so very infrequently, and few people die relative to other energy sources (hydro dam failures have killed 100k in one incident, coal kills more each day than nuclear ever killed). Nuclear safety per TWh is on par with wind and solar (which kill very few people e.g. from ice throw and falling off roofs). Radioactive? Ok, fission products are radioactive. Can't argue with that. Do you really think Steven Pinker is in the nuclear lobby?

coldtea 8y ago
>Do you really think Steven Pinker is in the nuclear lobby No, he's just safely away from any fallout, hugely optimistic, naive about government competence and private sector morality (e.g. in cutting corners), and perfectly fine to rush technology and just wait and see the consequences and let the second order effects and externalities be suffered by others (which has nothing to do with science per se)...
Krasnol 8y ago
> Old? Unlocking the energy of the nucleus is certainly our most recent energy resource, by any measure. Old as in "outdated". > hydro dam failures have killed 100k in one incident Yeah flooding are surely more dramatic than a slow death through cancer, I give you that...and it's such a good selling point isn't it? You just can't see it or put a finger on it. Some numbers are far less dramatic then a flood. Too bad Netflix comes with that documentary on Chernobyl now. Need to pay for some more op-eds to cover that up. > Do you really think Steven Pinker is in the nuclear lobby? Do you have to be part of the lobby if you take the money? And I doubt it came from Goldstein or his publishers just to promote his book. The timing of the whole nuclear hype is just too coincidental.
- acidburnNSA 8y ago
  Nuclear hype is timeless, it's caused by the fact that there are 2 million times more Joules in each kg of uranium than in any chemical fuel. This natural resource is astounding, and it's a very human thing to try to put it to work for the good of humankind. Anti-nuclear media is also status quo. The industry has been dealing with it for decades. I don't think the HBO thing is going to tip the scale too much. There are documentaries about plane crashes too, yet we still fly. The key point I don't think you granted me is that the numbers are in, and nuclear is definitively and quantitatively a very safe form of energy. Certainly the perception is not in line with this, but if you look at the numbers it's clear. Thus we have a public education issue.
  - Krasnol 8y ago
    > Nuclear hype is timeless The only timeless thing about nuclear is the the waste. Something many future generations can have to be pissed about us. Nobody was talking about nuclear for years before that new hype started a few months ago and suddenly it's allover the place. Come on... > Thus we have a public education issue. No we don't and painting the opposition to the hype as stupid or uneducated only hurts nuclear. It's been a constant mistake by the nuclear lobby throughout their history and it's one more reason why the hype will fail in the end. The lobby can scream as loud as they want it won't be louder as the rapid development in renewables and the unwillingness of the whole world to invest into a dead technology nobody outside the hype wants. The investors jumped off already years ago. Get over it.
    - acidburnNSA 8y ago
      There are hundreds of millions of dollars per year going into advanced nuclear from big investors right now in the USA. Check out Kairos, USNC, TerraPower, etc. https://www.thirdway.org/graphic/keeping-up-with-the-advanced-nuclear-industry https://www.thirdway.org/graphic/keeping-up-with-the-advance... I am not painting opposition as stupid. I'm painting the general public as unaware that nuclear is statistically quite safe compared with almost all other energy sources. There is almost no nuclear lobby to speak of. Nuclear advocacy is almost all grassroots.
      - Krasnol 8y ago
        https://www.iea.org/tcep/power/nuclear/ https://www.iea.org/tcep/power/nuclear/ Why would you even invest in anything that looks like that? Especially compared to the curves here: https://www.iea.org/tcep/power/renewables/ https://www.iea.org/tcep/power/renewables/ Meanwhile at the construction sites: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/31/climate/nuclear-power-project-canceled-in-south-carolina.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/31/climate/nuclear-power-pro... https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/feb/03/fate-of-uks-nuclear-power-stations-in-doubt-over-ageing-infrastructure https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/feb/03/fate-of-... > There is almost no nuclear lobby to speak of. Nuclear advocacy is almost all grassroots. You have to be kidding me. Even if you somehow missed the recent hype driven by people like Michael Shellenberger, you can't assume that a billion dollar industry in decline has no lobby and is "grassroots".

coldtea 8y ago

>Do you really think Steven Pinker is in the nuclear lobby No, he's just safely away from any fallout, hugely optimistic, naive about government competence and private sector morality (e.g. in cutting corners), and perfectly fine to rush technology and just wait and see the consequences and let the second order effects and externalities be suffered by others (which has nothing to do with science per se)...

Krasnol 8y ago

> Old? Unlocking the energy of the nucleus is certainly our most recent energy resource, by any measure. Old as in "outdated". > hydro dam failures have killed 100k in one incident Yeah flooding are surely more dramatic than a slow death through cancer, I give you that...and it's such a good selling point isn't it? You just can't see it or put a finger on it. Some numbers are far less dramatic then a flood. Too bad Netflix comes with that documentary on Chernobyl now. Need to pay for some more op-eds to cover that up. > Do you really think Steven Pinker is in the nuclear lobby? Do you have to be part of the lobby if you take the money? And I doubt it came from Goldstein or his publishers just to promote his book. The timing of the whole nuclear hype is just too coincidental.

acidburnNSA 8y ago
Nuclear hype is timeless, it's caused by the fact that there are 2 million times more Joules in each kg of uranium than in any chemical fuel. This natural resource is astounding, and it's a very human thing to try to put it to work for the good of humankind. Anti-nuclear media is also status quo. The industry has been dealing with it for decades. I don't think the HBO thing is going to tip the scale too much. There are documentaries about plane crashes too, yet we still fly. The key point I don't think you granted me is that the numbers are in, and nuclear is definitively and quantitatively a very safe form of energy. Certainly the perception is not in line with this, but if you look at the numbers it's clear. Thus we have a public education issue.
- Krasnol 8y ago
  > Nuclear hype is timeless The only timeless thing about nuclear is the the waste. Something many future generations can have to be pissed about us. Nobody was talking about nuclear for years before that new hype started a few months ago and suddenly it's allover the place. Come on... > Thus we have a public education issue. No we don't and painting the opposition to the hype as stupid or uneducated only hurts nuclear. It's been a constant mistake by the nuclear lobby throughout their history and it's one more reason why the hype will fail in the end. The lobby can scream as loud as they want it won't be louder as the rapid development in renewables and the unwillingness of the whole world to invest into a dead technology nobody outside the hype wants. The investors jumped off already years ago. Get over it.
  - acidburnNSA 8y ago
    There are hundreds of millions of dollars per year going into advanced nuclear from big investors right now in the USA. Check out Kairos, USNC, TerraPower, etc. https://www.thirdway.org/graphic/keeping-up-with-the-advanced-nuclear-industry https://www.thirdway.org/graphic/keeping-up-with-the-advance... I am not painting opposition as stupid. I'm painting the general public as unaware that nuclear is statistically quite safe compared with almost all other energy sources. There is almost no nuclear lobby to speak of. Nuclear advocacy is almost all grassroots.
    - Krasnol 8y ago
      https://www.iea.org/tcep/power/nuclear/ https://www.iea.org/tcep/power/nuclear/ Why would you even invest in anything that looks like that? Especially compared to the curves here: https://www.iea.org/tcep/power/renewables/ https://www.iea.org/tcep/power/renewables/ Meanwhile at the construction sites: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/31/climate/nuclear-power-project-canceled-in-south-carolina.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/31/climate/nuclear-power-pro... https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/feb/03/fate-of-uks-nuclear-power-stations-in-doubt-over-ageing-infrastructure https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/feb/03/fate-of-... > There is almost no nuclear lobby to speak of. Nuclear advocacy is almost all grassroots. You have to be kidding me. Even if you somehow missed the recent hype driven by people like Michael Shellenberger, you can't assume that a billion dollar industry in decline has no lobby and is "grassroots".