3 ms·
Yes, it's "clean energy as long as" - unlike coal or oil or gas which is dirty energy no matter what. So realistically let's enjoy our blessings and stop fearin
by nickpp 4y ago
Yes, it's "clean energy as long as" - unlike coal or oil or gas which is dirty energy no matter what. So realistically let's enjoy our blessings and stop fearing such an incredible energy source just because somewhere someday something might go wrong.
Those "extremely high downsides" are a few tens of square km dead lands and a few irradiated workers. Not such a bad perspective for a worst case scenario.
- bayesian_horse 4y agoThe Fukushima incident had a cost of at least a trillion Dollars, with the estimate rising. Yes, there were lower estimates, those are old. Tschernobyl is still a hazard. You could argue it was a benefit that Russian soldiers irradiated themselves by digging trenches in contaminated dirt, but that's about it. And you probably underestimate the probability of such things happening. Bad intent is unpredictable. Bad intentions plus negligence plus accidents usually turns out to be worse than imagined, especially on this timeframe.