4 ms·

When discussing the safety of nuclear power most comments seem to focus on the number of deaths. While death count is tragic in itself, it doesn't capture the f

When discussing the safety of nuclear power most comments seem to focus on the number of deaths. While death count is tragic in itself, it doesn't capture the full extent of human drama. Consider this Fukushima "the nuclear accident was responsible for 154,000 being evacuated" "In December 2016 the government estimated decontamination, compensation, decommissioning, and radioactive waste storage costs at 21.5 trillion yen ($187 billion), nearly double the 2013 estimate." Chernobyl "In 2005, the total cost over 30 years for Belarus alone was estimated at US$235 billion; about $301 billion in today's dollars given inflation rates." "between 5% and 7% of government spending in Ukraine is still related to Chernobyl" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disa.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disa.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster

yongjik 7y ago
Well, for comparison, https://e360.yale.edu/digest/coal-costs-us-half-trillion-annually-in-hidden-costs-study-says https://e360.yale.edu/digest/coal-costs-us-half-trillion-ann... > Coal production costs the U.S. up to $500 billion each year in hidden health, economic, and environmental impacts, according to a new study by Harvard researchers. https://www.eci.ox.ac.uk/news/2018/0606.html https://www.eci.ox.ac.uk/news/2018/0606.html > ... Britain’s car addiction ... is likely costing our NHS and society in general more than £6 billion per year. (Which is about $7B USD, for a single modest-sized country, for a single mode of fossil fuel consumption, per year.) https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2018/03/19/climate-change-could-force-over-140-million-to-migrate-within-countries-by-2050-world-bank-report https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2018/03/19/c... > Climate Change Could Force Over 140 Million to Migrate Within Countries by 2050: World Bank Report (Well, of course, such predictions are very imprecise: it could be 30 million, or 2 billion. But most likely more than Fukushima, by a very wide margin.)
gnode 7y ago
I think it's important to avoid treating the history of nuclear power as expectation for its future use. Nuclear power has evolved, much like fossil fuel power has evolved. When we consider future use of fossil fuels, we do not think of the Great Smog of London which acutely killed 4000 people in a few days, plus around 6000 in the following months. Cognitive biases prevent us from being as forgiving with nuclear power, despite the evolution of its safety.
- cm2187 7y ago
  Or more recent industrial accidents like the Bhopal disaster (3000 deads). It's only one of a very long list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_industrial_disasters https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_industrial_disasters
JudgeWapner 7y ago
Consider this: Just as in aviation, with each nuclear accident we learn more and more about how to prevent the next one. We now know that building next to the ocean is a bad idea. we know now that we need even more redundancy to prevent power outages from causing meltdowns. when you criticize Fukushima, you're criticizing 1970's nuclear technology. Nobody is making the argument to build new 1970's technology.

yongjik 7y ago

Well, for comparison, https://e360.yale.edu/digest/coal-costs-us-half-trillion-annually-in-hidden-costs-study-says https://e360.yale.edu/digest/coal-costs-us-half-trillion-ann... > Coal production costs the U.S. up to $500 billion each year in hidden health, economic, and environmental impacts, according to a new study by Harvard researchers. https://www.eci.ox.ac.uk/news/2018/0606.html https://www.eci.ox.ac.uk/news/2018/0606.html > ... Britain’s car addiction ... is likely costing our NHS and society in general more than £6 billion per year. (Which is about $7B USD, for a single modest-sized country, for a single mode of fossil fuel consumption, per year.) https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2018/03/19/climate-change-could-force-over-140-million-to-migrate-within-countries-by-2050-world-bank-report https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2018/03/19/c... > Climate Change Could Force Over 140 Million to Migrate Within Countries by 2050: World Bank Report (Well, of course, such predictions are very imprecise: it could be 30 million, or 2 billion. But most likely more than Fukushima, by a very wide margin.)

gnode 7y ago

I think it's important to avoid treating the history of nuclear power as expectation for its future use. Nuclear power has evolved, much like fossil fuel power has evolved. When we consider future use of fossil fuels, we do not think of the Great Smog of London which acutely killed 4000 people in a few days, plus around 6000 in the following months. Cognitive biases prevent us from being as forgiving with nuclear power, despite the evolution of its safety.

cm2187 7y ago
Or more recent industrial accidents like the Bhopal disaster (3000 deads). It's only one of a very long list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_industrial_disasters https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_industrial_disasters

JudgeWapner 7y ago

Consider this: Just as in aviation, with each nuclear accident we learn more and more about how to prevent the next one. We now know that building next to the ocean is a bad idea. we know now that we need even more redundancy to prevent power outages from causing meltdowns. when you criticize Fukushima, you're criticizing 1970's nuclear technology. Nobody is making the argument to build new 1970's technology.