4 ms·
You're conflating pollution (which I take to mean typical by-products of both fuel generation i.e. during mining, and power generation i.e. at the plant) and ca
by phs318u 5y ago
You're conflating pollution (which I take to mean typical by-products of both fuel generation i.e. during mining, and power generation i.e. at the plant) and catastrophic destruction of the plant.
You may well be correct with respect to pollution - I don't know and certainly would find it tricky to determine (is there a consistent measure of "negative environmental impact" for comparing such things?).
However, with respect to catastrophic destruction, this recent example at a coal plant [0], pales in comparison to something like a Chernobyl or Fukushima.
[0] https://reneweconomy.com.au/worlds-newest-and-most-expensive-coal-plant-explodes-after-hydrogen-leak/ https://reneweconomy.com.au/worlds-newest-and-most-expensive...
- sofixa 5y ago> However, with respect to catastrophic destruction, this recent example at a coal plant [0], pales in comparison to something like a Chernobyl or Fukushima. That's not a catastrophic destruction, merely a generator explosion. Wikipedia has articles on mining and energy accidents, and you can see there are far more catastrophic one with coal: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mining_accident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mining_accident https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_accidents https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_accidents