4 ms·

Western democracies, Japan and South Korea are politically stable so power plant disruptions due to armed conflict on their territories are likely a relatively

by jdkee 5y ago

Western democracies, Japan and South Korea are politically stable so power plant disruptions due to armed conflict on their territories are likely a relatively low risk.

simulate-me 5y ago
pasquinelli 5y ago
politically stable for now. how long is the average period of political stability?
danhor 5y ago
If prosperous (as that's usually a match for a low chance of armed conflicht) nations mostly expand to non-fossil energy sources that aren't available/viable for developing/poorer nations, this is an issue since their power system won't profit from a large amount of research & investments on how to run a non-fossil fuel based system. With the energy usage of non-western countries exploding quickly this could be a major hinderance to stopping climate change if all prosperous nations go all-in on nuclear and discourage other countries from doing so because of the risk. A non realistic scenario tbh, it's very unlikely that e.g. germany will construct new nuclear power plants and a lot of not-very-stable countries already use nuclear power as we're seeing right now.
throwaway6532 5y ago
What about Russia? What if famine strikes and the nuclear engineers at a given power plant starve to death?
pvaldes 5y ago
Russia has been politically stable for the last 20 years also
- himinlomax 5y ago
  Poisoning and harassing political opponents does not strike me as particularly stable.
- KennyBlanken 5y ago
  Russia has had several significant nuclear material release incidents in the last twenty years, only detected because the waste/fallout plume reached monitoring sites outside the country. The most recent was the 2018 disaster involving a nuclear torpedo. Russia has used its reactors to produce materials to conduct political assassinations on foreign soil, which have ended up injuring and contaminating many innocent people.
kingkawn 5y ago
That you cite Japan as an example of reliable nuclear safety after Fukushima…
KennyBlanken 5y ago
The US and UK nuclear programs - commercial and military - are littered with incidents, many of them fatal or releasing significant quantities of radioactive waste. In one case, someone was likely murdered as part of a coverup (google Karen Silkwood.) The attitude during much of the US nuclear program was "you're either with us or you're for those commie bastards." In Japan, TEPCO demonstrated a long-running, stunning disregard for safety that led to the Fukashima disaster (and it was not Japan's first nuclear power plant disaster, either): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_nuclear_disaster#Prior_safety_concerns https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_nuclear_disaster#Pri... And as a reminder, Chernobyl happened because a bunch of engineers were basically engaged in a dick-measuring contest, likely to satisfy some apparatchik. I'd say the world's nuclear power programs have demonstrated extensively that humans as a whole can't handle the responsibilities, and now we have numerous, much safer alternatives. It's an absolute miracle we haven't had an accidental detonation of a nuclear weapon near a population center given bombs have even been released from planes, in some cases with multiple safety systems satisfied - and that the permissive action link system was almost completely bypassed by petulant air force commanders who had weapons set to (I wish I were making this up) codes of all zeros.
- natmaka 5y ago
  Don't forget KEPCO: https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS-Indictments_for_South_Korea_forgery_scandal-1010137.html https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS-Indictments_for_South_...

by jdkee 5y ago

Western democracies, Japan and South Korea are politically stable so power plant disruptions due to armed conflict on their territories are likely a relatively low risk.

simulate-me 5y ago

pasquinelli 5y ago

politically stable for now. how long is the average period of political stability?

danhor 5y ago

If prosperous (as that's usually a match for a low chance of armed conflicht) nations mostly expand to non-fossil energy sources that aren't available/viable for developing/poorer nations, this is an issue since their power system won't profit from a large amount of research & investments on how to run a non-fossil fuel based system. With the energy usage of non-western countries exploding quickly this could be a major hinderance to stopping climate change if all prosperous nations go all-in on nuclear and discourage other countries from doing so because of the risk. A non realistic scenario tbh, it's very unlikely that e.g. germany will construct new nuclear power plants and a lot of not-very-stable countries already use nuclear power as we're seeing right now.

throwaway6532 5y ago

What about Russia? What if famine strikes and the nuclear engineers at a given power plant starve to death?

pvaldes 5y ago

Russia has been politically stable for the last 20 years also

himinlomax 5y ago
Poisoning and harassing political opponents does not strike me as particularly stable.
KennyBlanken 5y ago
Russia has had several significant nuclear material release incidents in the last twenty years, only detected because the waste/fallout plume reached monitoring sites outside the country. The most recent was the 2018 disaster involving a nuclear torpedo. Russia has used its reactors to produce materials to conduct political assassinations on foreign soil, which have ended up injuring and contaminating many innocent people.

kingkawn 5y ago

That you cite Japan as an example of reliable nuclear safety after Fukushima…

KennyBlanken 5y ago

The US and UK nuclear programs - commercial and military - are littered with incidents, many of them fatal or releasing significant quantities of radioactive waste. In one case, someone was likely murdered as part of a coverup (google Karen Silkwood.) The attitude during much of the US nuclear program was "you're either with us or you're for those commie bastards." In Japan, TEPCO demonstrated a long-running, stunning disregard for safety that led to the Fukashima disaster (and it was not Japan's first nuclear power plant disaster, either): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_nuclear_disaster#Prior_safety_concerns https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_nuclear_disaster#Pri... And as a reminder, Chernobyl happened because a bunch of engineers were basically engaged in a dick-measuring contest, likely to satisfy some apparatchik. I'd say the world's nuclear power programs have demonstrated extensively that humans as a whole can't handle the responsibilities, and now we have numerous, much safer alternatives. It's an absolute miracle we haven't had an accidental detonation of a nuclear weapon near a population center given bombs have even been released from planes, in some cases with multiple safety systems satisfied - and that the permissive action link system was almost completely bypassed by petulant air force commanders who had weapons set to (I wish I were making this up) codes of all zeros.

natmaka 5y ago
Don't forget KEPCO: https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS-Indictments_for_South_Korea_forgery_scandal-1010137.html https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS-Indictments_for_South_...