4 ms·

Nuclear is the safest energy source. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-deathprint-a-price-always-paid/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/ja

Nuclear is the safest energy source. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-deathprint-a-price-always-paid/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-d...

bluejekyll 5y ago
Safer than solar, wind, and hydro?
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- MerelyMortal 5y ago
  If a damn fails, I imagine the result would be pretty devestating to anything downstream.
  - DrBazza 5y ago
    Yup. More deaths in this one dam failure in China than all worldwide nuclear deaths combined: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Banqiao_Dam_failure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Banqiao_Dam_failure
  - pvaldes 5y ago
    Big intensity, short duration. Nuclear accidents will be devastating for thousands of years so very different things. This is like saying that high voltage is harmless because high amperage can kill you also. Time to move on further in this discussion and stop talking about that damn. Is a popular stance but useless to compare both
- winkeltripel 5y ago
  Yeah. In solar and wind lots of deaths from falling off roofs or windmills.
  - polygloty 5y ago
    This is as much true as it is trolling
PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
> Nuclear is the safest energy source. The cited link shows that deaths directly attributable to nuclear power thus far is the lowest based on the data used. This is not the only definition of safety, and should not be portrayed as such. The primary objections to fission nuclear power has been the many-thousand-year half-life of the waste products, not that it would kill people while being built or while running. We have no way to project what the tally will look like in 10k years time.
- Yoric 5y ago
  That is absolutely true. However, we also risk an extinction event if we don't get carbon emissions under control, so turning a known 100 year risk into a several thousand years possible risk feels like a good bet.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
    I don't know of anyone suggesting that climate change is going to be an extinction event. Changing patterns of human settlement, and the state of human civilization? Certainly. Extinction? Doesn't seem likely right now, from everything I've read.
    - isoprophlex 5y ago
      So you'd rather see -- worst case -- the CO2 concentration explode and biomes altered radically, than having some local hotspots of radiation?
    - lacerrr 5y ago
      It's certainly going to be, and is already, an extinction event for many other species. While it's true that humans probably won't go extinct as easily, billions of lives may be lost to collapsing ecosystems. We can't feed ourselves at large scale without an ecosystem to support us. At this point, that risk is looking much, much worse than the risk carried by nuclear waste in the long term.
    - ohgodplsno 5y ago

Nuclear is the safest energy source. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-deathprint-a-price-always-paid/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-d...

bluejekyll 5y ago

Safer than solar, wind, and hydro?

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
MerelyMortal 5y ago
If a damn fails, I imagine the result would be pretty devestating to anything downstream.
- DrBazza 5y ago
  Yup. More deaths in this one dam failure in China than all worldwide nuclear deaths combined: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Banqiao_Dam_failure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Banqiao_Dam_failure
- pvaldes 5y ago
  Big intensity, short duration. Nuclear accidents will be devastating for thousands of years so very different things. This is like saying that high voltage is harmless because high amperage can kill you also. Time to move on further in this discussion and stop talking about that damn. Is a popular stance but useless to compare both
winkeltripel 5y ago
Yeah. In solar and wind lots of deaths from falling off roofs or windmills.
- polygloty 5y ago
  This is as much true as it is trolling

PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago

> Nuclear is the safest energy source. The cited link shows that deaths directly attributable to nuclear power thus far is the lowest based on the data used. This is not the only definition of safety, and should not be portrayed as such. The primary objections to fission nuclear power has been the many-thousand-year half-life of the waste products, not that it would kill people while being built or while running. We have no way to project what the tally will look like in 10k years time.

Yoric 5y ago
That is absolutely true. However, we also risk an extinction event if we don't get carbon emissions under control, so turning a known 100 year risk into a several thousand years possible risk feels like a good bet.
- PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
  I don't know of anyone suggesting that climate change is going to be an extinction event. Changing patterns of human settlement, and the state of human civilization? Certainly. Extinction? Doesn't seem likely right now, from everything I've read.
  - isoprophlex 5y ago
    So you'd rather see -- worst case -- the CO2 concentration explode and biomes altered radically, than having some local hotspots of radiation?
  - lacerrr 5y ago
    It's certainly going to be, and is already, an extinction event for many other species. While it's true that humans probably won't go extinct as easily, billions of lives may be lost to collapsing ecosystems. We can't feed ourselves at large scale without an ecosystem to support us. At this point, that risk is looking much, much worse than the risk carried by nuclear waste in the long term.
  - ohgodplsno 5y ago