4 ms·
The point was that nuclear power plants are dangerous, and even outside of Soviet Union bad things sometimes happen with them. > Is not a valid comparison to a
by avmich 4y ago
The point was that nuclear power plants are dangerous, and even outside of Soviet Union bad things sometimes happen with them.
> Is not a valid comparison to any commercially operating nuclear plant.
We sort of want to plan for unexpected. To model that unexpected, Chernobyl could be a good approximation.
- pdonis 4y ago> The point was that nuclear power plants are dangerous By this definition of "dangerous", other forms of power plants are much more dangerous. All other energy sources have killed or harmed many more people per unit of energy generated than nuclear has. > To model that unexpected, Chernobyl could be a good approximation. No, it isn't. That kind of comparison is like saying that, because bombs can explode, and explosives in bombs are chemically similar to gasoline, we shouldn't use gasoline in cars. It's simply not valid.
- himinlomax 4y ago> The point was that nuclear power plants are dangerous Dams are dangerous. To wit, they've killed many times more people than nuclear power plants ever have. People can and do fall off windmills. Gas can explode. Hydrocarbons cause global warming. PV cells are mostly made in tyrannical China with environmentally dubious sourcing and no independent oversight. Pick your poison; nuclear is the least of them.