3 ms·

All nuclear reactors are massively safer than coal power plants though. If you excluded climate change and Co2 emissions entirely and measured harm/deaths adjus

• Ray20 6mo ago
  > measured harm/deaths adjusted by the amount of power generated In this case, we find that nuclear nuclear reactors are 2 orders of magnitude more dangerous than gas and coal power plants.
  • don_esteban 6mo ago
    do you account for all the air pollution and downstream health effects coal power plants cause?
• ViewTrick1002 6mo ago
  Or you know, just build renewables and storage. Displace vastly more coal faster with a death per kWh where the only injuries comes from traditional construction and mechanical industry work. No need for any special casing.
  • FabHK 6mo ago
    > where the only injuries comes from traditional construction and mechanical industry work. Still count.
    • ViewTrick1002 6mo ago
      They do count, but look at it from a societal perspective. For the general public no harm can come their way. Unless they through some mechanical failure manage to walk underneath a wind turbine shedding or collapsing. Same with solar. Which is even less risky. For nuclear power the about all effects from a large scale failure will impact society through either radiation or life changing evacuations. And then society is on the hook to pay for the entire cleanup work. For renewables the only people who get harmed are those who work in the industry. The risk for the general public is zero.
      • Moldoteck 6mo ago
        evacuation in Fukushima was forced. They could have stayed just as well - dose was too small. Statistically nuclear is great. Even more so considering fossil firming strategy in many countries
        • ViewTrick1002 5mo ago
          Here your blind conviction always praise nuclear power lost you the plot. All based on hindsight. Knowing the outcome that happened and perfectly slicing the decisions to fit that. How do you expect to be the politician ordering not to evacuate when you have a nuclear plant in unstable condition undergoing hydrogen explosions while you’re flying blind about the true state of things. You know, the hindsight.
          • Moldoteck 5mo ago
            Radiation data was known. Due to sensors outside of the plant area. Jp govt ignored it. Even more so, after the accident when the situation was certain, evacuation orders weren't immediately cancelled to let people back into their homes despite the dose being very low, in some cases even below natural background radiation levels in other areas of Japan Unnecessary evacuation killed over 2.3k people. That's half of waht are expected to die fron Chernobyl accident over a century per UN or about 5 times more vs nr of expected deaths per updated UNSCEAR reports. Fear of nuclear killed more people than nuclear itself ij this case
            • ViewTrick1002 5mo ago
              You’re still missing the point. Radiation data was known. But that assumes that it can’t change. How can you assume that nothing will change for nuclear plant undergoing hydrogen explosions which you’ve lost all control over? I think you know this, which is why your stuck in hindsight and trying to shift the discussion to other topics.
              • Moldoteck 5mo ago
• deleted 6mo ago
  [deleted]