4 ms·
It's great! Except for those used radioactive materials taking hundreds of years to become safe, and a documented failure of modern human society to handle long
by prewett 4y ago
It's great! Except for those used radioactive materials taking hundreds of years to become safe, and a documented failure of modern human society to handle long-term problems, and especially to maintain a culture of safety longer than a few decades. And except for reactor failures rendering large chunks of land uninhabitable for decades.
When I started off as a developer, I would routinely forget to check for null pointers, because my underlying assumption was that nobody would pass a null pointer. Years later, and now my underlying assumption is: if it can happen, it will. I assume my functions will be given bad input. Likewise, I assume there will be catastrophic nuclear failures and failures in storing the waste. (For instance, look at the bad incentives that PG&E gets and how they respond, with the result that PG&E equipment starts a lot of fires. Would you want PG&E running nuclear power plants with the current culture?) Am I willing to live with those? Well, it's a hard sell.
- ElectricalUnion 4y agoThe interesting thing behind nuclear is that everyone is very aware of the dangers it can externalize, while for alternative base load power generation the damages caused by external costs are often downplayed and ignored. Coal ash for example is much more radioactive (around 100x more) that your average nuclear power plant. But we ignore it because it's released in the air and "vanishes", a external cost. CO2 and several other pollutants currently released by non-nuclear base load power generation takes way more that "hundreds of years to become safe" in the amounts and rates that human beings are currently throwing it in the atmosphere. But we ignore it because it's released in the air and "vanishes", a external cost.