3 ms·
The reason we care about those things is that they kill people. It turns out that, even with those things, nuclear kills fewer people than everything else. Wind
by MostlyStable 3y ago
The reason we care about those things is that they kill people. It turns out that, even with those things, nuclear kills fewer people than everything else. Wind turbines kill people other ways. Hydro dams literally have the record for the single most catastrophic energy related disaster in the 1975 Banqiao Dam failure. And even dams that don't fail are so much worse for the environment that I can't even explain it. Dams on the west coast are probably the single biggest reason for the collapse of west coast salmon populations (among countless other species). Dams are an ecological disaster even when they are working perfectly. Nuclear at least has to fail before it causes major issues.
- kibwen 3y ago> nuclear kills fewer people than everything else For some reason, this seems to have omitted solar power from the list of examples of technologies that have a higher body count than nuclear power. In the meantime, let's examine how many cities have needed to be evacuated due to the catastrophic failure of solar plants.
- orwin 3y agoYou're probably joking, but solar installation killed my uncle's employee (he had 3), which made him sell his installation business (he still has 2 solar farms I think). I'm pretty sur solar kill more per generated MW than wind. The main difference is that solar/wind only kill or inconvenience/maim blue collar workers. It's like chemical spills in North America, you only hear about it if it inconvenience white collar or large owners, if it's only 30k blue collar workers, it'll hardly make national news.