3 ms·
My usual comment, bury it deep with signs as we already do. If we've lost the ability to read signs, we've lost the ability to dig deep and will never encounte
by DrBazza 3y ago
My usual comment, bury it deep with signs as we already do.
If we've lost the ability to read signs, we've lost the ability to dig deep and will never encounter it.
The risk of death from any form of nuclear waste is insignificant compared to fact we've already killed tens if not hundreds of thousands of people killed mining for fossil fuels through to those killed by extreme weather caused by climate change right now.
- gottorf 3y ago> to those killed by extreme weather caused by climate change right now. FYI, the number of deaths attributed to climate over the 50-year period from 1970 to 2019 dropped to a third[0], even as the world population more than doubled and atmospheric CO2 went from 325ppm to 410ppm at the same time. That's one-third of the absolute number of deaths, not one-third the rate. This can be attributed to the increasing capacity of those in developing countries to deal with the vagaries of their natural environment, enabled by cheap energy from fossil fuels. [0]: https://library.wmo.int/idurl/4/57564 https://library.wmo.int/idurl/4/57564
- titzer 3y ago> by cheap energy from fossil fuels. Obviously the issue at hand is that use of those fossil fuels has led to a huge unpaid debt (negative externality) in the form of compounding climate change. But even without that, the number of deaths attributed to air pollution is estimated at 7 million annually. Air pollution pretty much all comes from burning fossil fuels. So you aren't counting right.
- SpaceLawnmower 3y agoI'm interested in what the parent doesn't find convincing about this. Seems pretty straightforward to me. There's tons of isolated places we could put nuclear waste in the US.