5 ms·

You can see their point though right? We can use Nuclear power but have to except every 30 years or so an accident will happen causing a massive exclusion zone

You can see their point though right? We can use Nuclear power but have to except every 30 years or so an accident will happen causing a massive exclusion zone and clean up op. Doesn't sound like a fair price to pay to me (and a lot of others).

kmlx 7y ago
we just continue burning coal then.
- darkcha0s 7y ago
  Because that's the only alternative to Nuclear energy...
  - kmlx 7y ago
    of course not. there's also natural gas and oil. check this out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_energy_consumption https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_energy_consumption coal (30%) gas (24%) oil (33%) hydro (7%) nuclear (4%) other renewables (2%)
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
VMG 7y ago
Experts have studied this and came to the opposite conclusion: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/death-rates-from-energy-production-per-twh https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/death-rates-from-energy-p... https://www.statista.com/statistics/494425/death-rate-worldwide-by-energy-source/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/494425/death-rate-worldw...
fouronnes3 7y ago
Nuclear has the lowest death/Wh ratio.
- swarnie_ 7y ago
  I understand that, another user has linked some good sources. Never heard of Solar leaving a large chunk of a country uninhabitable for millennia though.
  - VMG 7y ago
    Coal it is then.
    - Tade0 7y ago
      Coal is dead - natural gas killed it for better or worse.
      - kmlx 7y ago
        check my link below. it's powering 30% of all our energy, only behind oil (33%).
        Tade0 7y ago
        *Today. More and more countries are getting rid of it in favour of cheaper and more flexible natural gas. Sure, there's China with its insatiable appetite for energy, but few years back they too shuttered 105 coal plant projects, and this is something that's likely to continue purely because of how the economics are playing out nowadays.
- eeZah7Ux 7y ago
  ...as long as you completely ignore any risk of large catastrophes.

kmlx 7y ago

we just continue burning coal then.

darkcha0s 7y ago
Because that's the only alternative to Nuclear energy...
- kmlx 7y ago
  of course not. there's also natural gas and oil. check this out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_energy_consumption https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_energy_consumption coal (30%) gas (24%) oil (33%) hydro (7%) nuclear (4%) other renewables (2%)

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

VMG 7y ago

Experts have studied this and came to the opposite conclusion: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/death-rates-from-energy-production-per-twh https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/death-rates-from-energy-p... https://www.statista.com/statistics/494425/death-rate-worldwide-by-energy-source/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/494425/death-rate-worldw...

fouronnes3 7y ago

Nuclear has the lowest death/Wh ratio.

swarnie_ 7y ago
I understand that, another user has linked some good sources. Never heard of Solar leaving a large chunk of a country uninhabitable for millennia though.
- VMG 7y ago
  Coal it is then.
  - Tade0 7y ago
    Coal is dead - natural gas killed it for better or worse.
    - kmlx 7y ago
      check my link below. it's powering 30% of all our energy, only behind oil (33%).
      - Tade0 7y ago
        *Today. More and more countries are getting rid of it in favour of cheaper and more flexible natural gas. Sure, there's China with its insatiable appetite for energy, but few years back they too shuttered 105 coal plant projects, and this is something that's likely to continue purely because of how the economics are playing out nowadays.
eeZah7Ux 7y ago
...as long as you completely ignore any risk of large catastrophes.