3 ms·

>It's the energy source that has the fewest deaths per MWH produced Source? I want to remind that the nuclear material needs to be mined somewhere. I never w

>It's the energy source that has the fewest deaths per MWH produced Source? I want to remind that the nuclear material needs to be mined somewhere. I never worked in a Uranium mine but it's probably not the healthiest job in the world. Then the material needs to be transported, transported a long way. During this way it gets enriched, used, cooled down. Maybe even re-enriched, used, some part get stuck in walls, pipes ("contamination") etc. At some point it gets stored, somewhere in the ground. During this long way radiation and material gets emitted. Nuclear dust is cancerogenous for the lungs, radiation in general is suspected of boosting leucemia rates. But the worst part in my opinion is this: NO insurance company in the world will insure a nuclear power plant.

mixmax 13y ago
Here is a source - http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-source.html http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-so... Note that nuclear is significantly safer than even hydro and solar. I think your fear of uranium mines is overblown, as these numbers are included in the calculations. Many more people die in coalmines. Did you know that a coal plant emits significantly more radiation than a nuclear plant because coal is radioactive and isn't shielded like nuclear power plants?
- blablabla123 13y ago
  mixmax, this source is about China.
dpark 13y ago
> NO insurance company in the world will insure a nuclear power plant. This is hardly a meaningful claim. Insurance companies in the US won't write flood insurance policies, either. This doesn't mean that your house is very likely to get washed away in a flood. It means that the business is not profitable because no one wants to pay the premiums required to insure for the worst-case, nor do insurance companies want to sit on the piles of cash necessary to insure these sorts of events. As a counter-point, hydroelectric power plants are also not insured for worst-case scenarios. And when hydroelectric dams fail, the results can be orders of magnitude worse than Nuclear meltdown. e.g.: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banqiao_Dam http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banqiao_Dam
- blablabla123 13y ago
  > This is hardly a meaningful claim. Insurance companies in the US won't write flood insurance policies, either. Insurance companies in the EU do, you need to pay for it though. >As a counter-point, hydroelectric power plants are also not insured for worst-case scenarios. And when hydroelectric >dams fail, the results can be orders of magnitude worse than Nuclear meltdown. Interesting, so do you think Three Gorges Dam is a good idea?

mixmax 13y ago

Here is a source - http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-source.html http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-so... Note that nuclear is significantly safer than even hydro and solar. I think your fear of uranium mines is overblown, as these numbers are included in the calculations. Many more people die in coalmines. Did you know that a coal plant emits significantly more radiation than a nuclear plant because coal is radioactive and isn't shielded like nuclear power plants?

blablabla123 13y ago
mixmax, this source is about China.

dpark 13y ago

> NO insurance company in the world will insure a nuclear power plant. This is hardly a meaningful claim. Insurance companies in the US won't write flood insurance policies, either. This doesn't mean that your house is very likely to get washed away in a flood. It means that the business is not profitable because no one wants to pay the premiums required to insure for the worst-case, nor do insurance companies want to sit on the piles of cash necessary to insure these sorts of events. As a counter-point, hydroelectric power plants are also not insured for worst-case scenarios. And when hydroelectric dams fail, the results can be orders of magnitude worse than Nuclear meltdown. e.g.: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banqiao_Dam http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banqiao_Dam

blablabla123 13y ago
> This is hardly a meaningful claim. Insurance companies in the US won't write flood insurance policies, either. Insurance companies in the EU do, you need to pay for it though. >As a counter-point, hydroelectric power plants are also not insured for worst-case scenarios. And when hydroelectric >dams fail, the results can be orders of magnitude worse than Nuclear meltdown. Interesting, so do you think Three Gorges Dam is a good idea?