4 ms·
The mining and waste are much smaller scale due to the incredible energy density of nuclear. Look at how ugly coal gets, for the same amount of energy. Kids do
by lordnacho 4y ago
The mining and waste are much smaller scale due to the incredible energy density of nuclear.
Look at how ugly coal gets, for the same amount of energy. Kids down in the mines, miner's strikes when it ended, people dying of smog. All sorts of terrible things derived from coal need to be included in this comparison.
The only thing nuclear really has against it is that when it goes wrong it can go really wrong. And people have thought about those modes of failure quite a bit, so why don't we see if they've come up with something?
We should try nuclear and see where it goes.
- salty_biscuits 4y agoThere is also the nuclear weapons proliferation bit. I'm honestly more concerned about that than accidents.
- smackeyacky 4y agoIt doesn't have to be that way. I'm no great fan of Nuclear power (although mostly because we know it will be privatised and the private company running it will suddenly be bankrupt when it comes to the clean up) but the US and Russia hid a lot of their weapons development behind "too cheap to meter" nuclear power stations. I wouldn't guarantee they would not do that again, but the incentives are very different this time around, so the design of the power stations shouldn't produce material suitable for modern nuclear weapons as a side effect.
- throwaway894345 4y agoRegarding privatization, we could easily require private companies to put up a bond/insurance for the cleanup so they pay for it ahead of time thus preventing issues if they go bankrupt. I say “easily” because passing anti-nuclear regulation seems to be the one thing the US federal government can get done effectively.