3 ms·
>It is insane to consider nuclear a safer choice than solar and wind. It isn't. Nuclear is by far the safest choice, of the given, It account for 17% of elect
by Ygg2 11y ago
>It is insane to consider nuclear a safer choice than solar and wind.
It isn't.
Nuclear is by far the safest choice, of the given, It account for 17% of electricity output and when you look at deaths per Kwh it's the safest source of energy, bar none.
Nuclear energy is the airplane of transportation. Safest form we invented yet, but when things go wrong, which rarely happens it makes for a better news.
- toomuchtodo 11y agoI should've constrained my statement; nuclear is safe when properly managed, and a sensible choice when it can be completed on time and under budget. Rarely, if ever, is a nuclear generation facility completed on time and under budget.
- Ygg2 11y agoNo, the problem is that nuclear is overall safest it contributes a large portion of electricity and small percent of all deaths. Because it's both a powerful source and its nature makes people very careful, so they generally are good at avoiding stupid mistakes. The nature of other power sources is that have a slow trickle of uninspiring deaths - worker falls into turbine (OH NO THE TURBINES ARE EVIL!), person falls off a roof installing solar panels, workers killed in a mine, workers killed on the oil rig. They are so small and numerous it becomes background noise. When nuclear powerplant goes bad, it goes with a bang. International press coverage, rescue operations, etc. Look at Fukushima. It took a friggin' tsunami to mess up that old plant and even then, they managed to avoid Chernobyl scenario.