MataVatnik@lemmy.world to Science Memes@mander.xyzEnglish · 2 years agoAnon questions our energy sectorslrpnk.netimagemessage-square39fedilinkarrow-up1618arrow-down191
arrow-up1527arrow-down1imageAnon questions our energy sectorslrpnk.netMataVatnik@lemmy.world to Science Memes@mander.xyzEnglish · 2 years agomessage-square39fedilink
minus-squarezero_spelled_with_an_ecks@programming.devlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up20arrow-down5·2 years agoOne time? Wikipedia says over 100 serious incidents and lists about 30 of them. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nuclear_and_radiation_accidents_and_incidents&wprov=rarw1 It’s fine if you like nuclear, just don’t try and claim it was one time. It poses serious risk and should be treated as such.
minus-squareMataVatnik@lemmy.worldOPlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up9arrow-down2·2 years agoLook up deaths per kWHr of different energy sources and come back to me
minus-squareWoodScientist@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up9·2 years agoIt has that low death rate precisely because it is heavily regulated. The typical nuclear booster argument works on the following circular logic: “Nuclear is perfectly safe.” “But that’s not the problem with nuclear. The problem with nuclear is its too expensive.” “Nuclear is expensive because it’s overly regulated!” “But nuclear is only safe because of those heavy regulations!” “We would have everything powered by nuclear by now if it weren’t for Greenpeace.”
minus-squarezero_spelled_with_an_ecks@programming.devlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3arrow-down1·2 years agoThat’s not my point and I’m already aware.
One time? Wikipedia says over 100 serious incidents and lists about 30 of them. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nuclear_and_radiation_accidents_and_incidents&wprov=rarw1
It’s fine if you like nuclear, just don’t try and claim it was one time. It poses serious risk and should be treated as such.
Look up deaths per kWHr of different energy sources and come back to me
It has that low death rate precisely because it is heavily regulated.
The typical nuclear booster argument works on the following circular logic:
“Nuclear is perfectly safe.”
“But that’s not the problem with nuclear. The problem with nuclear is its too expensive.”
“Nuclear is expensive because it’s overly regulated!”
“But nuclear is only safe because of those heavy regulations!”
“We would have everything powered by nuclear by now if it weren’t for Greenpeace.”
That’s not my point and I’m already aware.