5 ms·
Well it's scary in the abstract. Which is why to make a rational assessment you need details (of relevant half-life, volumes, ocean dispersal directions & rates
by crispinb 7y ago
Well it's scary in the abstract. Which is why to make a rational assessment you need details (of relevant half-life, volumes, ocean dispersal directions & rates, etc). Hard for us laypersons to assess, so it's easier to be scared (if you're anti-nuclear inclined) or complacent (if you're reflexively pro tech).
- FooHentai 7y agoin situations of doubt there's the Precautionary Principle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_principle
- crispinb 7y agoWhether that's relevant depends on the source of the doubt, and the relative payoffs. The primary source of doubt in this case (ie. something with no numbers attached being thought of as 'scary') is ignorance. If that doubt remained after expert consultation, and the negative payoff from the release had a potential to be high, sure, it would be reasonable to apply the principle. But only after that process, not before.