3 ms·

> Nuclear energy accounts for about 6% of the world's energy mix. It is the safest source of carbon-free energy in terms of deaths per TWh in the world, ...as

> Nuclear energy accounts for about 6% of the world's energy mix. It is the safest source of carbon-free energy in terms of deaths per TWh in the world, ...as long as you completely ignore the risk of large catastrophic events. Like nuclear power plants being targeted during a war.

arcticbull 6y ago
How about hydro dams? Bangqiao killed 200,000 people. There's plenty of things you can try and hit in war, and nuclear reactors aren't generally located near population centers. Nice thing about America and its enemies is it's (a) really hard to get to America and (b) its enemies can just lob their own nuclear weapons at America instead of hoping to hit Los Alamos. If deathly fear of war were an issue we'd probably be building cities underground.
- throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
  Because nuclear is subject to the same problems as anything else, namely human nature (inc. human stupidity). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Banqiao_Dam_failure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Banqiao_Dam_failure "The construction of the dams thus emphasized the goal of retaining water and overlooked their capacities to prevent floods, while the quality of the dams was also compromised due to the Great Leap Forward. Some experts have also pointed out that the Great Leap Forward as well as "Learn from Dazhai in agriculture" severely damaged the ecosystem and forest cover in the region, which was a major cause of the flood, and the government's mishandling of the dam failure, however, further contributed to the casualties." So shitpile upon shitpile. Also see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Banqiao_Dam_failure#Whistle-blower https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Banqiao_Dam_failure#Whist... Further "The Chinese government deems the dam failure a natural one as opposed to man-made disaster" so still denying reality. This is why I am uncomfortable with nuclear, not at all because it's intrinsically unsafe but because it will be done cheapest. And if one country does everything on cost uber alles, it's the US (as a brit we're close behind). Chernobyl happened not because a well-built and well-run reactor unexpectedly went bad. Incidentally, from same link: "estimated death toll ranging from 85,600 to 240,000" so your quote is towards the upper limit Additionally, the death toll was again partly due to mismanagement: "For example, while only 827 out of 6,000 people died in the evacuated community of Shahedian just below Banqiao Dam, half of a total of 36,000 people died in the unevacuated Wencheng commune" So again the death toll could have been lower if people in charge hadn't been stupid - but they were.

arcticbull 6y ago

How about hydro dams? Bangqiao killed 200,000 people. There's plenty of things you can try and hit in war, and nuclear reactors aren't generally located near population centers. Nice thing about America and its enemies is it's (a) really hard to get to America and (b) its enemies can just lob their own nuclear weapons at America instead of hoping to hit Los Alamos. If deathly fear of war were an issue we'd probably be building cities underground.

throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
Because nuclear is subject to the same problems as anything else, namely human nature (inc. human stupidity). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Banqiao_Dam_failure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Banqiao_Dam_failure "The construction of the dams thus emphasized the goal of retaining water and overlooked their capacities to prevent floods, while the quality of the dams was also compromised due to the Great Leap Forward. Some experts have also pointed out that the Great Leap Forward as well as "Learn from Dazhai in agriculture" severely damaged the ecosystem and forest cover in the region, which was a major cause of the flood, and the government's mishandling of the dam failure, however, further contributed to the casualties." So shitpile upon shitpile. Also see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Banqiao_Dam_failure#Whistle-blower https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Banqiao_Dam_failure#Whist... Further "The Chinese government deems the dam failure a natural one as opposed to man-made disaster" so still denying reality. This is why I am uncomfortable with nuclear, not at all because it's intrinsically unsafe but because it will be done cheapest. And if one country does everything on cost uber alles, it's the US (as a brit we're close behind). Chernobyl happened not because a well-built and well-run reactor unexpectedly went bad. Incidentally, from same link: "estimated death toll ranging from 85,600 to 240,000" so your quote is towards the upper limit Additionally, the death toll was again partly due to mismanagement: "For example, while only 827 out of 6,000 people died in the evacuated community of Shahedian just below Banqiao Dam, half of a total of 36,000 people died in the unevacuated Wencheng commune" So again the death toll could have been lower if people in charge hadn't been stupid - but they were.