4 ms·
I wonder if they stop making them because it makes a country vunerable? After all enemies of the nation have to just blow up a few reactors to cause major damag
by gingabriska 7y ago
I wonder if they stop making them because it makes a country vunerable? After all enemies of the nation have to just blow up a few reactors to cause major damage, right? But if a solar or wind or even coal plant is bombed, not much happens?
- dsfyu404ed 7y agoHydroelectric power is more of a vulnerability in a strategic sense. If everything downstream is flooded it's gone until it's fixed and/or rebuild. If everything is irradiated it's still useful, you just can't let people get too exposed to it.
- quakeguy 7y ago2 points to consider here, first the damage to the grid in terms of lost power, second the environmental damage. For nuclear both are quite severe, but blowing up a dam could be devastating in both points too, think of the flooding etc.. Blowing up single wind turbines is ineffective in both terms, and damaging a coal/oil plant only in regards to the first point(Well, there will be environmental damage too, but not on the scale a terrorist desires..) Solar seems to be the safest with that in in mind.