3 ms·

This is not really calculable, nor is the number of people killed by coal calculable in any reasonable manner. However the impact of nuclear catastrophe is far

This is not really calculable, nor is the number of people killed by coal calculable in any reasonable manner. However the impact of nuclear catastrophe is far far more insidious and lasting, particularly when caused by a global calamity that causes meltdown in many plants.

ars 13y ago
> This is not really calculable, nor is the number of people killed by coal calculable in any reasonable manner. Of course it is. 161 people are killed for each THw of coal energy. And 0.04 people for each THw of nuclear power and this INCLUDES Chernobyl! http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-source.html http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-so... http://www-958.ibm.com/software/data/cognos/manyeyes/datasets/1fa41e6c4fb211e0b29f000255111976/versions/1 http://www-958.ibm.com/software/data/cognos/manyeyes/dataset... > However the impact of nuclear catastrophe is far far more insidious and lasting Clearly you've never seen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingston_Fossil_Plant_coal_fly_ash_slurry_spill https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingston_Fossil_Plant_coal_fly... the radiation and heavy metals released from that can never be cleaned (just diluted). > particularly when caused by a global calamity that causes meltdown in many plants. A what?? And how do you manage that? If you have unreasonable fears then there is no point in talking to you. Reason will not remove an unreasonable fear.
- crystaln 13y ago
  I suppose fear of a 9+ earthquake followed by a massive tsunami off the coast of Fukushima was considered unreasonable. We are on a blob of rock hurtling through an unknown cosmos. Calamities are very possible. It is deeply irresponible to create projects that will make large parts of the earth uninhabitable should the power grid fail for a long period or human stewardship go on hiatus. Meteor strikes, emps, plagues, terrorist attacks, economic collapse,and other disasters are well within the realm of possibility

ars 13y ago

> This is not really calculable, nor is the number of people killed by coal calculable in any reasonable manner. Of course it is. 161 people are killed for each THw of coal energy. And 0.04 people for each THw of nuclear power and this INCLUDES Chernobyl! http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-source.html http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-so... http://www-958.ibm.com/software/data/cognos/manyeyes/datasets/1fa41e6c4fb211e0b29f000255111976/versions/1 http://www-958.ibm.com/software/data/cognos/manyeyes/dataset... > However the impact of nuclear catastrophe is far far more insidious and lasting Clearly you've never seen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingston_Fossil_Plant_coal_fly_ash_slurry_spill https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingston_Fossil_Plant_coal_fly... the radiation and heavy metals released from that can never be cleaned (just diluted). > particularly when caused by a global calamity that causes meltdown in many plants. A what?? And how do you manage that? If you have unreasonable fears then there is no point in talking to you. Reason will not remove an unreasonable fear.

crystaln 13y ago
I suppose fear of a 9+ earthquake followed by a massive tsunami off the coast of Fukushima was considered unreasonable. We are on a blob of rock hurtling through an unknown cosmos. Calamities are very possible. It is deeply irresponible to create projects that will make large parts of the earth uninhabitable should the power grid fail for a long period or human stewardship go on hiatus. Meteor strikes, emps, plagues, terrorist attacks, economic collapse,and other disasters are well within the realm of possibility