2 ms·
Compared to the CO2 from burning coal, which we know what it does and we also don't have a great solution for, and the fact that mining coal is also dangerous/n
by guitarbill 7y ago
Compared to the CO2 from burning coal, which we know what it does and we also don't have a great solution for, and the fact that mining coal is also dangerous/not risk free?
I'd also love an ideal world without nuclear or fossil fuels, but that doesn't make it real.
- pl-94 7y agoYup. Fuels + coals are directly killing a few millions per year because the storage is the atmosphere. There is no green source of energy, but some sources (hydro, nuclear, renewables) are several orders of magnitude more letals than other sources, whereas some sources are several orders of magnitude cheaper than renewable energies (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_accidents https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_accidents)
- bayesian_horse 7y agoThat comparison is useless and misleading. It's still a fact that people don't want radioactive waste stored in their vicinity, and in democratic countries they can and will prevent such storage indefinitely. And who can really blame them? The stuff is undeniably lethal and scary. There seems to be a majority of people who don't really trust a theoretical, probabilistic safety when the downside risk is this catastrophic. And on top of that, lots of "impossible" accidents have happened, further eroding public trust in theoretical safety.