4 ms·

I never claimed they can generate a nuclear detonation, but consider your strawman thoroughly refuted. They can, as demonstrated, leak radioactive particles.

by x0x0 12y ago

I never claimed they can generate a nuclear detonation, but consider your strawman thoroughly refuted. They can, as demonstrated, leak radioactive particles. You continue to claim that because something hasn't happened yet, it won't. Flight happened for 60 years before the SR-71. Just to pick one obvious example. 301 people dying in Turkey is irrelevant (though obviously my condolences to their families). Coal doesn't have the ability to, for example, leak radioactive particles over the entirety of nyc. Which we have no practical method to evacuate.

ceejayoz 12y ago
You're entirely missing the point. http://www.rmi.org/RFGraph-health_effects_from_US_power_plant_emissions http://www.rmi.org/RFGraph-health_effects_from_US_power_plan... indicates 13,000 deaths a year attributable to coal. In the extraordinarily unlikely (given better reactor design and regulation) event of a Chernobyl-level incident near NYC, in the extraordinarily unlikely (given that Chernobyl killed 100) event it kills 10% of New York City, nuclear power's death toll would still only match coal's during that time. Incidentally, Chernobyl's exclusion zone is ~30km radius. There aren't any plants that close to NYC - they're generally carefully placed and have extensive evacuation plans in place for the surrounding areas.
- x0x0 12y ago
  Dude, you're the one arguing that nuclear plants don't detonate like bombs, a point contested solely in your head. Your facts about chernobyl are misleading. Pripyat -- population roughly 50k -- was evacuated. Hence few direct deaths. What can't we possibly do in nyc? Evacuate it. And it's not like there's a magical air filter 30km outside nuclear plants. Indian Point has 15 million living within 50 miles at most. Hope Creek is 40 miles from Philly. And those two are just off the top of my head. Unless your strategy in the case of a meltdown is to hope that the winds blow the right direction -- in which case I reiterate my point about luck.

by x0x0 12y ago

ceejayoz 12y ago

You're entirely missing the point. http://www.rmi.org/RFGraph-health_effects_from_US_power_plant_emissions http://www.rmi.org/RFGraph-health_effects_from_US_power_plan... indicates 13,000 deaths a year attributable to coal. In the extraordinarily unlikely (given better reactor design and regulation) event of a Chernobyl-level incident near NYC, in the extraordinarily unlikely (given that Chernobyl killed 100) event it kills 10% of New York City, nuclear power's death toll would still only match coal's during that time. Incidentally, Chernobyl's exclusion zone is ~30km radius. There aren't any plants that close to NYC - they're generally carefully placed and have extensive evacuation plans in place for the surrounding areas.

x0x0 12y ago
Dude, you're the one arguing that nuclear plants don't detonate like bombs, a point contested solely in your head. Your facts about chernobyl are misleading. Pripyat -- population roughly 50k -- was evacuated. Hence few direct deaths. What can't we possibly do in nyc? Evacuate it. And it's not like there's a magical air filter 30km outside nuclear plants. Indian Point has 15 million living within 50 miles at most. Hope Creek is 40 miles from Philly. And those two are just off the top of my head. Unless your strategy in the case of a meltdown is to hope that the winds blow the right direction -- in which case I reiterate my point about luck.