4 ms·
> And they cost us half a century of progress on decarbonization in the process. They also likely prevented more Chernobyls and Fukushimas. Whether that was a
by dctoedt 3y ago
> And they cost us half a century of progress on decarbonization in the process.
They also likely prevented more Chernobyls and Fukushimas. Whether that was a net gain is something that can be debated, of course.
- palata 3y agoFrom my point of view, both those events did not have catastrophic outcomes. Also Chernobyl is a special case (nobody makes similar reactors, so it's not like it's an existing risk in every plant). Everything has an impact on the environment, you won't find a silver bullet here. But you have to compare the solutions. Fossil fuels are orders of magnitude worse than nuclear, even considering a Chernobyl once in a while.