6 ms·
1. Because it's important to make sure people claiming good-doing are actually doing good and not out for back patting. 2. Because nuclear is wildly misunderst
by junon 6y ago
1. Because it's important to make sure people claiming good-doing are actually doing good and not out for back patting.
2. Because nuclear is wildly misunderstood, has progressed dramatically in the last two decades, and has a bad stigma because of incidents in the past caused by poorly designed facilities and cut corners. The incidence rate of nuclear is ridiculously small, and most of the arguments against it have scientific and completely positive responses. It is a viable solution that parrots love to put down because "oh no chernobyl".
- z3t4 6y agoI live 1500km (its a rather long distance) from Chernobyl and we still have to measure radiation in wildlife to check if its edible.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- olau 6y agoIt's unclear what you mean by progress. Due to improved security nuclear plants have gotten more expensive, and as a results almost no new ones are being built in the Western world to replace those that are shutting down. The industry is slowly whittling down. Now you can start inventing excuses why this is happening (popular ones are the greens, and the governments, and scared people, and also people who don't want to pay for the transition off fossil fuels). But it IS happening. There's a fair amount of hype surrounding nuclear tech, e.g. in the form of small plants, but so far that's all vapourware. They are not competing on commercial terms, or even close to.
- pydry 6y ago>most of the arguments against it have scientific and completely positive responses. It costs more than every other form of renewable energy even when variability is taken into account. I've yet to hear a scientific response to this that doesn't involve some sort of FUD around variability.
- 93po 6y agoIt only costs more if you completely ignore the costs of environmental destruction of the alternatives. Scrub every damaging particle caused by non-nuclear power and then tell me which is more expensive