Re:Deaths per unit of energy for various sources
by iujyhgtfhj on Wednesday March 16, 2011 @08:01PM
(#2334519)
What if the 8year old kid died of heavy metal poisoning because we stripped mined his water supply for coal?
Or he lived downstream from an oil sands fracking plant?
Or he lived in Bangladesh and global warming caused his land to flood.
Or he live din Africa and starved because we pay more for corn to make biofuel than he can afford.
Or he lived in the middle east on top of our oil and we had to drop some laser guided democracy on him?
Re:Deaths per unit of energy for various sources
by VBprogrammer on Wednesday March 16, 2011 @08:26PM
(#2334573)
I know that was simply an emotional response and I don't want to take anything away from the child who died, but to point to a specific child and say that they died because of Chernobyl is no more logical than to look at the snow on the ground outside and declare that Global Warming is a hoax.
You can afford to be snarky when you didn't see a 8-year old died of leukemia because of Chernobyl. I don't care if HN bans me or anything, but as someone how has known and befriended such a kid, I tell you this: fuck you. Children dying of leukemia because of radiation is worst than hell on earth (not that I'm a spiritual person anyway).
And just FYI, my brother lives close to a hydroelectric plant that were it to collapse then he would be dead in maximum 10-15 minutes (this is the plant: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vidraru_Dam). My father's uncle (after whom I'm named), who was a technician at that dam, actually died while working there (a control room got flooded before he could escape from it). But it doesn't matter, I would still choose hydro over nuclear, because it just feels right.