4 ms·
Strong disagree. And the brushing off of large scale risks from current technology, fail-deadly nuclear is very irresponsible. Nuclear has the possibility for
by whearyou 6y ago
Strong disagree. And the brushing off of large scale risks from current technology, fail-deadly nuclear is very irresponsible.
Nuclear has the possibility for point-scale accidents to render large areas permanently uninhabitable. Given the fallibility of human social organizations point scale accidents are guaranteed in all domains. Therefor using nuclear power is conceding areas will be rendered uninhabitable. As we saw with the Chernobyl near miss and since, these areas may be as large as a continent in the case the point scale accident is bad.
Note all of this changes if nuclear technology is fail-safe. Examples include the fusion-seeded fission model, and the candlestick reactor model. Technology here is severely underfunded in interest of fail-deadly technologies more likely to be implemented and yield profit in the short term, even if we’re running huge risks by adopting them.
In the era of Covid where we see how badly our social systems can fail, the hand wavy attitude toward nuclear is simply appalling.
- simion314 6y ago>Nuclear has the possibility for point-scale accidents to render large areas permanently uninhabitable I disagree with your point, but on a tangent, didn't US(and others) explode nuclear bombs in caves,deserts, space etc so maybe there are such desert areas where you can have nuclear plants where nobody would be affected.