News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Fusion reactors: Not what they’re cracked up to be by Robotbeat on Wednesday April 26, 2017 @11:09AM (#14203588)
There is always some impact.

There's a disease in our energy discussions where if something has ANY effect or can be measured at all, it is considered a big no-no. We lack a sense of proportion. Radiation is SUPER easy to measure even tiny amounts, for instance, since you can look for the signature of a certain decay tree, so people hear that you can measure radiation from Fukushima and lose their minds. Likewise, people make a big deal about solar using up a lot of land, but then forget that agriculture uses up on the order of 100 TIMES the land that solar would take up if we relied entirely on solar for electricity. The sense of scale is entirely lacking.

Re:Fusion reactors: Not what they’re cracked up to be by VLM on Wednesday April 26, 2017 @11:17AM (#14203665)
"The sense of scale is entirely lacking."

Agree and it extends to risks. Better to kill 100K people per year with coal, than possibly maybe hundreds might die (but almost certainly zero actually will) in a nuclear accident. Your diet and your car are far more likely to kill you than global warming.

Re:Fusion reactors: Not what they’re cracked up to be by macintux on Wednesday April 26, 2017 @11:48AM (#14204024)
> Your diet and your car are far more likely to kill you than global warming.

True for me. True for my (entirely hypothetical and never likely to exist) grandchildren? Less clear.

Re:Fusion reactors: Not what they’re cracked up to be by mikeash on Wednesday April 26, 2017 @03:09PM (#14206009)
An example of this which always gets me with nuclear power is the waste problem. The fact that the waste remains dangerous for tens of thousands of years is always held up as a huge problem, completely ignoring the vast quantities of extremely poisonous chemical waste produced by other industries which lasts forever.

"This waste is dangerous." "OK, guess we'd better be careful with it."

"This waste is dangerous for the next 10,000 years." "Holy shit! We need to build a high-tech underground fortress to contain it!"

Re:Fusion reactors: Not what they’re cracked up to be by sgift on Wednesday April 26, 2017 @04:17PM (#14206584)
> "This waste is dangerous for the next 10,000 years." "Holy shit! We need to build a high-tech underground fortress to contain it!"

Time is a major risk factor. Look where we were 10,000 years ago. There is relevant chance that 10,000 years in the future no one will easily understand the danger of radiation anymore, so we have to prepare for that possibility.

Re:Fusion reactors: Not what they’re cracked up to be by mikeash on Wednesday April 26, 2017 @04:30PM (#14206678)
You seem to have missed the other half of the point I was making, which was that there's lots of non-nuclear hazardous waste which lasts forever and we don't get nearly as upset about those.