Re:Japan Pictures Likely Show Melted Fukushima Fuel for Firs...
by mikeash on Saturday July 22, 2017 @01:29PM
(#14828251)
Nuclear plants sometimes kill people when they fail. Coal plants kill vast numbers of people when they work. And the latter number is far, far larger than the former. Why is that an indictment of nuclear?
Re:Japan Pictures Likely Show Melted Fukushima Fuel for Firs...
by Houshalter on Saturday July 22, 2017 @01:39PM
(#14828307)
At least nuclear is possible to contain. It would cost vastly more than mere billions to contain the damage of coal. So no one even tries. And it has killed vastly more people.
But the news can't get flashy photos of areas destroyed by coal damage. It doesn't happen in big single events that the news likes to cover. So the damage seems basically invisible compared to nuclear. If the news reported on every death and environmental incident caused by coal et al, it would be banned within a year.
Re:Japan Pictures Likely Show Melted Fukushima Fuel for Firs...
by madaxe_again on Saturday July 22, 2017 @02:14PM
(#14828496)
You're forgetting about coal mining, which is one of the most life expectancy reducing occupations there is.
Furthermore, coal plants can and do explode - aerosolised coal dust goes with a bang.
Edit: also, I frequently hear this argument about coal, but it's not a choice between nuclear and coal. Nuclear advocates promote investment in nuclear, but if we were to invest huge amounts into new energy infrastructure, we might as well invest in renewables, rather than another dirty hard to manage source.