3 ms·

The example you linked above is disposal of nuclear weapons waste, not nuclear power generation. This isn't even the same material (plutonium vs uranium). Sure,

The example you linked above is disposal of nuclear weapons waste, not nuclear power generation. This isn't even the same material (plutonium vs uranium). Sure, there were plenty of bad nuclear waste disposal programs in the early cold war, but this has quite limited relevance to nuclear power generation. And again, the question remains how people may be harmed by nuclear waste buried in bedrock half a kilometer underground? A even if a buried waste canister spontaneously combusts, how does the waste make it through half a kilometer of rock? In order for an unknown harm to occur, harm first has to actually occur. This kind of appeal to an unknown harm can be used to arbitrarily object to anything. "We need to stop building solar panels and wind turbines because they have the potential to cause an unknown harm. You disagree that these systems have the potential to cause harm? Well of course you can't know this, because it's an unknown harm that we're trying to prevent. How can you possibly disprove the existence of an unknown harm?"

bobmcnamara 1y ago
> This isn't even the same material (plutonium vs uranium). Please note that these are both chemically and radioactively harmful to people. > Sure, there were plenty of bad nuclear waste disposal programs in the early cold war, but this has quite limited relevance to nuclear power generation. That's what they said in the 00s, 90s, 80s, 70s... > In order for an unknown harm to occur, harm first has to actually occur. Nuclear power is an incredible technology, but understand that the nuclear industry has done little to earn trust. Just feels like an abusive ex plastered on the porch shouting "it'll be difficult this time I've changed" and doesn't inspire confidence.
- Manuel_D 1y ago
  > Please note that these are both chemically and radioactively harmful to people. Again, the point is that your link is about disposal of plutonium from nuclear weapons productions. Not spent uranium fuel from power generation. > Nuclear power is an incredible technology, but understand that the nuclear industry has done little to earn trust. Just feels like an abusive ex plastered on the porch shouting "it'll be difficult this time I've changed" and doesn't inspire confidence. Care to elaborate on what you mean by this? Because even if you include Chernobyl, nuclear power is one of the safest form of energy generation: https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy. It's 100x safer than dams. Include only western plants and it's the safest form of energy generation. It's not like an abusive ex promising to have changed. It's a lot more like a very respectful partner that your hippie friends hate for incoherent reasons.
bobmcnamara 1y ago
>> Nuclear power is an incredible technology, but understand that the nuclear industry has done little to earn trust. Just feels like an abusive ex plastered on the porch shouting "it'll be different this time I've changed" and doesn't inspire confidence. > Care to elaborate on what you mean by this? Because even if you include Chernobyl, nuclear power is one of the safest form of energy generation: https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy. It's 100x safer than dams. Include only western plants and it's the safest form of energy generation. I should also add that on average nuclear power releases less radioactivity than coal. I grew up in a place and time where nuclear waste was routinely dumped, records lost, EPA government consultants lied, and people got sick. Nobody was held accountable other than token fines.
- Manuel_D 1y ago
  > I grew up in a place and time where nuclear waste was routinely dumped, records lost, EPA government consultants lied, and people got sick. Nobody was held accountable other than token fines. Can you provide even one example where nuclear waste from power generation - not nuclear weapons production - got people sick in the United States?
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - bobmcnamara 1y ago
    The people here primarily got sick because their machining waste wasn't recognized as dangerous, it wasn't appropriately collected, spread through the site, and hury people that didn't even work in those areas. https://www.ncronline.org/earthbeat/government-workers-were-kept-dark-about-their-toxic-workplace https://www.ncronline.org/earthbeat/government-workers-were-... https://www.kansas.com/news/local/article49479255.html https://www.kansas.com/news/local/article49479255.html The local uranium mills were primarily weapons related -fuel for breeder reactors. For the power industry we have to drive to the other side of the state, over to Hematite, where each time a former employee comes down with any rare cancer from a long list, it's assumed to from working at the plant. What about mining waste causing increased cancer and largely poisoning a river? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Rock_uranium_mill_spill https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Rock_uranium_mill_spi... "Pre-burnup doesn't count" is exactly what an abusive ex would say.

bobmcnamara 1y ago

> This isn't even the same material (plutonium vs uranium). Please note that these are both chemically and radioactively harmful to people. > Sure, there were plenty of bad nuclear waste disposal programs in the early cold war, but this has quite limited relevance to nuclear power generation. That's what they said in the 00s, 90s, 80s, 70s... > In order for an unknown harm to occur, harm first has to actually occur. Nuclear power is an incredible technology, but understand that the nuclear industry has done little to earn trust. Just feels like an abusive ex plastered on the porch shouting "it'll be difficult this time I've changed" and doesn't inspire confidence.

Manuel_D 1y ago
> Please note that these are both chemically and radioactively harmful to people. Again, the point is that your link is about disposal of plutonium from nuclear weapons productions. Not spent uranium fuel from power generation. > Nuclear power is an incredible technology, but understand that the nuclear industry has done little to earn trust. Just feels like an abusive ex plastered on the porch shouting "it'll be difficult this time I've changed" and doesn't inspire confidence. Care to elaborate on what you mean by this? Because even if you include Chernobyl, nuclear power is one of the safest form of energy generation: https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy. It's 100x safer than dams. Include only western plants and it's the safest form of energy generation. It's not like an abusive ex promising to have changed. It's a lot more like a very respectful partner that your hippie friends hate for incoherent reasons.

bobmcnamara 1y ago

>> Nuclear power is an incredible technology, but understand that the nuclear industry has done little to earn trust. Just feels like an abusive ex plastered on the porch shouting "it'll be different this time I've changed" and doesn't inspire confidence. > Care to elaborate on what you mean by this? Because even if you include Chernobyl, nuclear power is one of the safest form of energy generation: https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy. It's 100x safer than dams. Include only western plants and it's the safest form of energy generation. I should also add that on average nuclear power releases less radioactivity than coal. I grew up in a place and time where nuclear waste was routinely dumped, records lost, EPA government consultants lied, and people got sick. Nobody was held accountable other than token fines.

Manuel_D 1y ago
> I grew up in a place and time where nuclear waste was routinely dumped, records lost, EPA government consultants lied, and people got sick. Nobody was held accountable other than token fines. Can you provide even one example where nuclear waste from power generation - not nuclear weapons production - got people sick in the United States?
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- bobmcnamara 1y ago
  The people here primarily got sick because their machining waste wasn't recognized as dangerous, it wasn't appropriately collected, spread through the site, and hury people that didn't even work in those areas. https://www.ncronline.org/earthbeat/government-workers-were-kept-dark-about-their-toxic-workplace https://www.ncronline.org/earthbeat/government-workers-were-... https://www.kansas.com/news/local/article49479255.html https://www.kansas.com/news/local/article49479255.html The local uranium mills were primarily weapons related -fuel for breeder reactors. For the power industry we have to drive to the other side of the state, over to Hematite, where each time a former employee comes down with any rare cancer from a long list, it's assumed to from working at the plant. What about mining waste causing increased cancer and largely poisoning a river? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Rock_uranium_mill_spill https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Rock_uranium_mill_spi... "Pre-burnup doesn't count" is exactly what an abusive ex would say.