3 ms·
> I sort of see nuclear power plants (at least certain designs) as a ticking time bomb But that's just progress, right? Even now we still do stupid things wit
by DrBazza 5y ago
> I sort of see nuclear power plants (at least certain designs) as a ticking time bomb
But that's just progress, right? Even now we still do stupid things with regular chemicals despite knowing not to.
Every chemical process evolves and gets safer. 1st gen nuclear power stations were/are potentially able to meltdown. Newer designs can't. But we can never be safe from human stupidity and wars.
For example - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_industrial_disasters https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_industrial_disasters
And even recently: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Beirut_explosion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Beirut_explosion
Somehow people will ignore those disasters as they're not nuclear, but Chernobyl+Fukashima everyone remembers. It just feels like "meltdown and waste" whilst genuine concerns, aren't really the conversation-ending arguments people pretend them to be.
(edit - I live within 15 miles of a nuclear power station, and I'm completely comfortable with that).
- throwaway6532 5y agoI think you miss my point. My frame of reference is society has collapsed and the _people_ that keep nuclear safe are no longer around and this has the potential to cause a Beyond Design Basis Accident the likes of which could render large portions of the planet uninhabitable. I'm generally fine with nuclear as long as society can maintain itself and the data back up what the proponents of nuclear claim. I'm just suspecting that every reactor that could and would meltdown if humans were no longer around to attend to it being left to meltdown completely unmitigated would be a disaster of epic proportions.