3 ms·
But this is a bit fallacious, isn't it? For any argument about a large policy change, must we block it if we can find even one person for whom there has been a
by mabbo 6y ago
But this is a bit fallacious, isn't it? For any argument about a large policy change, must we block it if we can find even one person for whom there has been a vaguely related side effect? And the example you give was caused not by nuclear reactors for energy.
How many people in Africa die each day in large part because of poverty? Cheap, abundant energy would do so much to pull people out of that poverty. It could revolutionize the continent. It sure helped the west over the last 70 years.
- taylorlapeyre 6y agoThis is essentially the "effective altruism" argument, and I don't disagree with it. I was simply explaining my gut reaction, which I think is also worth discussion alongside a conversation about the true value of nuclear energy. People's perception of nuclear energy is just as important for policy as the science of nuclear energy.