3 ms·

... After it had been running for a decade or two and caused significant harm to all life, sure. This is one of those issues where being visible distorts the

... After it had been running for a decade or two and caused significant harm to all life, sure. This is one of those issues where being visible distorts the perceived damage. Tourism would probably also have adapted to seeing the large lake. Seems a little silly to focus on preserving the appearance of a hole in the ground over, idk, most life on earth.

BurningFrog 3y ago
A single coal plant does not threat "most life on earth".
- firtoz 3y ago
  A single typical nuke doesn't cause extinction either
- arghwhat 3y ago
  And that attitude is why we are in a "death by a thousand cuts" scenario. Even just the single plant alone is incredibly harmful: Coal power plants are estimated to cause an average of 25 (direct and indirect) deaths per PWh, 33 for brown coal. A 2GW power plant makes 17PWh per yeah, which extrapolates to 432 deaths per year. https://www.statista.com/statistics/494425/death-rate-worldwide-by-energy-source/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/494425/death-rate-worldw...
  - gunapologist99 3y ago
    Those statistics are complete fiction.
    - Retric 3y ago
      Hardly, pollution deaths get lumped into many other statistics but you can work backwards. It’s the same basic math as figuring out how many cancers were caused by Hiroshima. Individually some people would have gotten cancer either way so you can’t guarantee some specific person died from that exposure, but you can compare populations and find statistically significant differences.
      - gunapologist99 3y ago
        > you can compare populations and find statistically significant differences. No, you can't. There are far too many variables involved, people confuse correlation with causation, ignore the null hypothesis, and most of all: the people doing these calculations in the first place (on either side) have an axe to grind.
        defrost 3y ago
        The people doing these studies have access to the same data, access to multiple bomb detonation exposure data, and have a broad background in terms of axes to grind. The bulk of those involved want to know the true risks and aren't motivated to under or over report. Discrepencies in results stand out. Here's one study (third in a series, IIRC) on the two bombs in Japan. https://bioone.org/journals/radiation-research/volume-187/issue-5/RR14492.1/Solid-Cancer-Incidence-among-the-Life-Span-Study-of-Atomic/10.1667/RR14492.1.full https://bioone.org/journals/radiation-research/volume-187/is... You can be specific in your objections, quote the parts you take issue with, etc.
        GildedIgel 3y ago
        Maybe _you_ can’t but this is well studied and robust. Do you also disagree with excess death calculations from the pandemic?
        pfannkuchen 3y ago
        I actually did find the excess death calculations to be questionable. The formula for expected deaths I saw used in the media was “the average of the last 5 years of deaths”. That seems like an incredible oversimplification. Population growth and age demographic trends alone would cause the actual expected deaths to trend upwards over time, and not capturing that would make this formula underestimate expected deaths (and therefore overestimate excess deaths). I did not see this problem addressed anywhere, did anyone else?
        gattilorenz 3y ago
WeylandYutani 3y ago
Can't build wind farms off the coast because rich people live there but the grand canyon is conveniently placed in fly over country. I am starting to understand why rural America hates the cities.
- pfannkuchen 3y ago
  The California coast, perhaps, but much of the coast in North America is actually not that nice, is it? At least in the PNW I don’t believe rich people live on the coast (though I have not actually been there to verify).
  - emfjfnfnf 3y ago
    California has beaches. Oregon and Washington have coast. A rich person might have a second/third house in the most beautiful of areas. Typically the coastal towns are depressed economically, and have a lot of confederate flag flying trucks.
- tomjakubowski 3y ago
  there are cities in "flyover country" and there are rural areas on both coasts. The offshore windmill projects sabotaged by wealthy people to keep their pristine coastal views are in places like cape cod, not in cities

BurningFrog 3y ago

A single coal plant does not threat "most life on earth".

firtoz 3y ago
A single typical nuke doesn't cause extinction either
arghwhat 3y ago
And that attitude is why we are in a "death by a thousand cuts" scenario. Even just the single plant alone is incredibly harmful: Coal power plants are estimated to cause an average of 25 (direct and indirect) deaths per PWh, 33 for brown coal. A 2GW power plant makes 17PWh per yeah, which extrapolates to 432 deaths per year. https://www.statista.com/statistics/494425/death-rate-worldwide-by-energy-source/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/494425/death-rate-worldw...
- gunapologist99 3y ago
  Those statistics are complete fiction.
  - Retric 3y ago
    Hardly, pollution deaths get lumped into many other statistics but you can work backwards. It’s the same basic math as figuring out how many cancers were caused by Hiroshima. Individually some people would have gotten cancer either way so you can’t guarantee some specific person died from that exposure, but you can compare populations and find statistically significant differences.
    - gunapologist99 3y ago
      > you can compare populations and find statistically significant differences. No, you can't. There are far too many variables involved, people confuse correlation with causation, ignore the null hypothesis, and most of all: the people doing these calculations in the first place (on either side) have an axe to grind.
      - defrost 3y ago
        The people doing these studies have access to the same data, access to multiple bomb detonation exposure data, and have a broad background in terms of axes to grind. The bulk of those involved want to know the true risks and aren't motivated to under or over report. Discrepencies in results stand out. Here's one study (third in a series, IIRC) on the two bombs in Japan. https://bioone.org/journals/radiation-research/volume-187/issue-5/RR14492.1/Solid-Cancer-Incidence-among-the-Life-Span-Study-of-Atomic/10.1667/RR14492.1.full https://bioone.org/journals/radiation-research/volume-187/is... You can be specific in your objections, quote the parts you take issue with, etc.
      - GildedIgel 3y ago
        Maybe _you_ can’t but this is well studied and robust. Do you also disagree with excess death calculations from the pandemic?
        pfannkuchen 3y ago
        I actually did find the excess death calculations to be questionable. The formula for expected deaths I saw used in the media was “the average of the last 5 years of deaths”. That seems like an incredible oversimplification. Population growth and age demographic trends alone would cause the actual expected deaths to trend upwards over time, and not capturing that would make this formula underestimate expected deaths (and therefore overestimate excess deaths). I did not see this problem addressed anywhere, did anyone else?
        gattilorenz 3y ago

WeylandYutani 3y ago

Can't build wind farms off the coast because rich people live there but the grand canyon is conveniently placed in fly over country. I am starting to understand why rural America hates the cities.

pfannkuchen 3y ago
The California coast, perhaps, but much of the coast in North America is actually not that nice, is it? At least in the PNW I don’t believe rich people live on the coast (though I have not actually been there to verify).
- emfjfnfnf 3y ago
  California has beaches. Oregon and Washington have coast. A rich person might have a second/third house in the most beautiful of areas. Typically the coastal towns are depressed economically, and have a lot of confederate flag flying trucks.
tomjakubowski 3y ago
there are cities in "flyover country" and there are rural areas on both coasts. The offshore windmill projects sabotaged by wealthy people to keep their pristine coastal views are in places like cape cod, not in cities