4 ms·

Which company would you trust to build and operate an nuclear power plant without putting profit over security?

by croes 2y ago

criley2 2y ago
Any of them? Coal is far more dangerous to human health and life than nuclear. Pick your quasi-legitimate source, but they all agree that coal is ~10X more deadly than nuclear. > Coal-fired energy chains are estimated to cause 12 times more deaths per gigawatt-ampere-year than nuclear energy chains, and coal is estimated to cause 820% more deaths per terawatt-hour of electricity produced than nuclear
- croes 2y ago
  Who said the choice is between coal and nuclear? I prefer solutions that don't emit poisonous substances into the atmosphere nor make areas dangerous for thousands of years in case of accidents.
  - throw0101c 2y ago
    > […] nor make areas dangerous for thousands of years in case of accidents. After ~250 years spent nuclear fuel is only dangerous if you (a) eat it, or (b) grind it up and snort it like cocaine. * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dx0p6QLMpg4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dx0p6QLMpg4 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2t2tYQsK94 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2t2tYQsK94 The long-lived stuff throws off mostly alpha particles (blocked by a sheet of paper) or beta particles (thin aluminium). The first few years (6-10) of spent fuel throws off the riskiest particles (gamma), and so the fuel sits in cooling pools for that period. The co-founder of the Chernobyl Tissue Bank, Geraldine Thomas, has no problem with nuclear power: "Look at the science – smoking and obesity are more harmful than radiation": * https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/apr/26/obesity-smoking-more-dangerous-radiation https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/apr/26/obesity-... * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geraldine_Thomas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geraldine_Thomas
  - abenga 2y ago
    > Who said the choice is between coal and nuclear? If an existing nuclear plant was shuttered while a coal plant was still running, that was the choice.
literallycancer 2y ago
It doesn't really matter as long as they can deliver what you ordered. Which you have to check regardless. So it's the skill of the buyer that decides the result.
- croes 2y ago
  We have seen how that worked out in aviation with Boeing.
eamsen 2y ago
Build: Siemens, AEG. Operate: PreussenElektra, EnBW, Vattenfall, RWE, EWN. Or was that a rhetorical question for a solution with a zero catastrophic failure rate (in Germany)?
- croes 2y ago
  Zero is impossible but Siemens, AEG, Vattenfall are examples of companies that value profit over security. Siemens can't even built proper WEC, what's the nuclear equivalent of blade breakage on wind turbine?
  - eamsen 2y ago
    Have there been catastrophic failures of fission reactors in Germany built by Siemens? Are you familiar with functional safety classification and how this affects the development of systems? Would you draw conclusions from the failure rate of Siemens vacuum cleaners to the company's capability of building fission reactors?
    - Herz 2y ago
      I would just like to find out more, do you have any sources I can look up to learn more about the "risk" topic?
    - croes 2y ago
      Don't those functional safety classifications exist for WECs? Now add the long history of Siemens briberies and the trust in that company goes to zero.
throw0101c 2y ago
> Which company would you trust to build and operate an nuclear power plant without putting profit over security? Whomever runs the nuclear power plants in Ontario, Canada, where I live: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_Canada#Ontario https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_Canada#O... * https://www.ieso.ca/Learn/Ontario-Electricity-Grid/Supply-Mix-and-Generation https://www.ieso.ca/Learn/Ontario-Electricity-Grid/Supply-Mi... * https://ieso.ca/power-data https://ieso.ca/power-data § "Supply" tab I live and work <50km from a nuclear power station.

Which company would you trust to build and operate an nuclear power plant without putting profit over security?

by croes 2y ago

Which company would you trust to build and operate an nuclear power plant without putting profit over security?

Any of them? Coal is far more dangerous to human health and life than nuclear. Pick your quasi-legitimate source, but they all agree that coal is ~10X more deadly than nuclear. > Coal-fired energy chains are estimated to cause 12 times more deaths per gigawatt-ampere-year than nuclear energy chains, and coal is estimated to cause 820% more deaths per terawatt-hour of electricity produced than nuclear

croes 2y ago
Who said the choice is between coal and nuclear? I prefer solutions that don't emit poisonous substances into the atmosphere nor make areas dangerous for thousands of years in case of accidents.
- throw0101c 2y ago
  > […] nor make areas dangerous for thousands of years in case of accidents. After ~250 years spent nuclear fuel is only dangerous if you (a) eat it, or (b) grind it up and snort it like cocaine. * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dx0p6QLMpg4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dx0p6QLMpg4 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2t2tYQsK94 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2t2tYQsK94 The long-lived stuff throws off mostly alpha particles (blocked by a sheet of paper) or beta particles (thin aluminium). The first few years (6-10) of spent fuel throws off the riskiest particles (gamma), and so the fuel sits in cooling pools for that period. The co-founder of the Chernobyl Tissue Bank, Geraldine Thomas, has no problem with nuclear power: "Look at the science – smoking and obesity are more harmful than radiation": * https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/apr/26/obesity-smoking-more-dangerous-radiation https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/apr/26/obesity-... * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geraldine_Thomas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geraldine_Thomas
- abenga 2y ago
  > Who said the choice is between coal and nuclear? If an existing nuclear plant was shuttered while a coal plant was still running, that was the choice.

literallycancer 2y ago

It doesn't really matter as long as they can deliver what you ordered. Which you have to check regardless. So it's the skill of the buyer that decides the result.

croes 2y ago
We have seen how that worked out in aviation with Boeing.

eamsen 2y ago

Build: Siemens, AEG. Operate: PreussenElektra, EnBW, Vattenfall, RWE, EWN. Or was that a rhetorical question for a solution with a zero catastrophic failure rate (in Germany)?

croes 2y ago
Zero is impossible but Siemens, AEG, Vattenfall are examples of companies that value profit over security. Siemens can't even built proper WEC, what's the nuclear equivalent of blade breakage on wind turbine?
- eamsen 2y ago
  Have there been catastrophic failures of fission reactors in Germany built by Siemens? Are you familiar with functional safety classification and how this affects the development of systems? Would you draw conclusions from the failure rate of Siemens vacuum cleaners to the company's capability of building fission reactors?
  - Herz 2y ago
    I would just like to find out more, do you have any sources I can look up to learn more about the "risk" topic?
  - croes 2y ago
    Don't those functional safety classifications exist for WECs? Now add the long history of Siemens briberies and the trust in that company goes to zero.

throw0101c 2y ago

> Which company would you trust to build and operate an nuclear power plant without putting profit over security? Whomever runs the nuclear power plants in Ontario, Canada, where I live: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_Canada#Ontario https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_Canada#O... * https://www.ieso.ca/Learn/Ontario-Electricity-Grid/Supply-Mix-and-Generation https://www.ieso.ca/Learn/Ontario-Electricity-Grid/Supply-Mi... * https://ieso.ca/power-data https://ieso.ca/power-data § "Supply" tab I live and work <50km from a nuclear power station.