3 ms·

It appears that your source is including Chernobyl and Fukushima, while my original post was specifically about the United States nuclear power industry. https

It appears that your source is including Chernobyl and Fukushima, while my original post was specifically about the United States nuclear power industry. https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy Even giving you the benefit of the doubt there, it's clear that nuclear is extremely safe. Plus it has the added benefit of, actually, you know, working (and by "working" I mean "producing energy in quantities sufficient to run a modern industrial society", not "works in someone's pipe dream").

tchaffee 4y ago
> it's clear that nuclear is extremely safe. It's clear that solar is extremely safe. And doesn't have a history in the US of evacuating over 150,000 people. Which nuclear does. > Plus it has the added benefit of, actually, you know, working (and by "working" I mean "producing energy in quantities sufficient to run a modern industrial society", not "works in someone's pipe dream" Modern solar works and continues to be installed at a rapid rate all over the world. Even France is phasing out nuclear. Westinghouse Electric went bankrupt over the Vogtle nuclear plant in discussion. The U.S. government has given $8.3 billion of loan guarantees to help finance construction of the Vogtle reactor. It's not viable anymore compared to very quick and simple to maintain solar plants. The future is sunny. Which is after all just nuclear energy at a safe distance.
- Turing_Machine 4y ago
  > And doesn't have a history in the US of evacuating over 150,000 people. Sorry, you don't get to count media hysteria as a "risk" of nuclear energy.
  - tchaffee 4y ago
    > Sorry, you don't get to count media hysteria as a "risk" of nuclear energy. It wasn't media hysteria. The evacuation was to protect people. On the seven-point International Nuclear Event Scale, it is rated Level 5. It was a partial meltdown, and there was a risk of explosion, releasing radiation into the general area. Not evacuating would have been grossly irresponsible. It is a matter of historical record that Met Ed had not informed state officials before conducting a steam venting from the plant. Convinced that the company was downplaying the severity of the accident, state officials turned to the NRC. Twenty-eight hours after the accident began, William Scranton III, the lieutenant governor, appeared at a news briefing to say that Metropolitan Edison, the plant's owner, had assured the state that "everything is under control". Later that day, Scranton changed his statement, saying that the situation was "more complex than the company first led us to believe". There were conflicting statements about radioactivity releases. Schools were closed and residents were urged to stay indoors. Farmers were told to keep their animals under cover and on stored feed. Governor Dick Thornburgh, on the advice of NRC chairman Joseph Hendrie, advised the evacuation "of pregnant women and pre-school age children...within a five-mile radius of the Three Mile Island facility". The evacuation zone was extended to a 20-mile radius on Friday, March 30. Where do you see the press taking action in any of the above except to repeat what state and NRC officials had decided? Can you name a US evacuation over a solar power accident?
    - Turing_Machine 4y ago
      > It wasn't media hysteria. It absolutely was media hysteria. Add "stupid and cowardly politicians" if you like. I'd be okay with that.
      - tchaffee 4y ago
        It absolutely was not media hysteria. > Add "stupid and cowardly politicians" if you like. Do you expect the average politician to be highly educated about when a nuclear meltdown in progress becomes dangerous enough to evacuate? Do you think politicians should be brave about the lives of others when faced with a nuclear meltdown? You can be brave with your own life -- that's your choice for sure -- but asking political leaders to risk the lives of hundreds of thousands of people just in order to make sure nuclear has a good name, seems quite off. Asking people to not be "cowardly" when faced with an actual nuclear meltdown in progress sounds more like a sociopath than of a leader tasked with the responsibility to protect people. Has any political leader ever had to be brave about a solar power plant disaster? Can you even name a solar power plant disaster?

tchaffee 4y ago

> it's clear that nuclear is extremely safe. It's clear that solar is extremely safe. And doesn't have a history in the US of evacuating over 150,000 people. Which nuclear does. > Plus it has the added benefit of, actually, you know, working (and by "working" I mean "producing energy in quantities sufficient to run a modern industrial society", not "works in someone's pipe dream" Modern solar works and continues to be installed at a rapid rate all over the world. Even France is phasing out nuclear. Westinghouse Electric went bankrupt over the Vogtle nuclear plant in discussion. The U.S. government has given $8.3 billion of loan guarantees to help finance construction of the Vogtle reactor. It's not viable anymore compared to very quick and simple to maintain solar plants. The future is sunny. Which is after all just nuclear energy at a safe distance.

Turing_Machine 4y ago
> And doesn't have a history in the US of evacuating over 150,000 people. Sorry, you don't get to count media hysteria as a "risk" of nuclear energy.
- tchaffee 4y ago
  > Sorry, you don't get to count media hysteria as a "risk" of nuclear energy. It wasn't media hysteria. The evacuation was to protect people. On the seven-point International Nuclear Event Scale, it is rated Level 5. It was a partial meltdown, and there was a risk of explosion, releasing radiation into the general area. Not evacuating would have been grossly irresponsible. It is a matter of historical record that Met Ed had not informed state officials before conducting a steam venting from the plant. Convinced that the company was downplaying the severity of the accident, state officials turned to the NRC. Twenty-eight hours after the accident began, William Scranton III, the lieutenant governor, appeared at a news briefing to say that Metropolitan Edison, the plant's owner, had assured the state that "everything is under control". Later that day, Scranton changed his statement, saying that the situation was "more complex than the company first led us to believe". There were conflicting statements about radioactivity releases. Schools were closed and residents were urged to stay indoors. Farmers were told to keep their animals under cover and on stored feed. Governor Dick Thornburgh, on the advice of NRC chairman Joseph Hendrie, advised the evacuation "of pregnant women and pre-school age children...within a five-mile radius of the Three Mile Island facility". The evacuation zone was extended to a 20-mile radius on Friday, March 30. Where do you see the press taking action in any of the above except to repeat what state and NRC officials had decided? Can you name a US evacuation over a solar power accident?
  - Turing_Machine 4y ago
    > It wasn't media hysteria. It absolutely was media hysteria. Add "stupid and cowardly politicians" if you like. I'd be okay with that.
    - tchaffee 4y ago
      It absolutely was not media hysteria. > Add "stupid and cowardly politicians" if you like. Do you expect the average politician to be highly educated about when a nuclear meltdown in progress becomes dangerous enough to evacuate? Do you think politicians should be brave about the lives of others when faced with a nuclear meltdown? You can be brave with your own life -- that's your choice for sure -- but asking political leaders to risk the lives of hundreds of thousands of people just in order to make sure nuclear has a good name, seems quite off. Asking people to not be "cowardly" when faced with an actual nuclear meltdown in progress sounds more like a sociopath than of a leader tasked with the responsibility to protect people. Has any political leader ever had to be brave about a solar power plant disaster? Can you even name a solar power plant disaster?