3 ms·
I have to admit these statistics are beautiful. Arguing that Nuclear is more save than Solar because of more people dieing from falling down their roof instead
by stfu 15y ago
I have to admit these statistics are beautiful. Arguing that Nuclear is more save than Solar because of more people dieing from falling down their roof instead of dying by Nuclear catastrophes is just supreme quantitative logic. It demonstrates so beautifully how numbers are excellent for focusing on a narrow feature (i.e. "correlatable" action-death relations) while totally blending out aspects such as long-term effects of nuclear waste and so on.
- vidarh 15y agoThe long-term effects of nuclear waste tend to get blown out of all proportion. The total amount of nuclear waste produced so far is so tiny that even if you were to spread it in the atmosphere you're unlikely to cause worse damage than what coal or oil does. Not least given the amount of radioactive material that gets spread by coal power plants. When you take into account the number of reactor designs that would allow using current nuclear waste again as input to other types of reactors, and the problem diminishes further.
- Androsynth 15y agoThis post and your comment remind me of Al Gore's 'An Inconvenient Truth'. As a politician, he went straight to fear-mongering rather than actually being a leader and moving us forward.