Re:A first for Canada: New type of nuclear plant opening by ...
by wasmitnetzen on Tuesday May 03, 2022 @09:39AM
(#31248154)
No, not really. If a coal plant is designed or run badly, it might burn down, and that's it. If a nuclear plant is designed or run badly, whole countries might be unlivable for centuries. The risks are not the same.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:A first for Canada: New type of nuclear plant opening by ...
by paulmd on Tuesday May 03, 2022 @11:56AM
(#31249869)
> No, not really. If a coal plant is designed or run badly, it might burn down, and that's it.
No, coal plants have spent-fuel disposal problems due to "human error"/poor management too. This one cost over $1b to clean up and required them to scrape off the topsoil and rendered the area essentially uninhabitable, just like fukushima. TVA ended up having to buy out the inhabitants and move them elsewhere.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingston_Fossil_Plant_coal_fly...
And the fun part is: that shit is actually radioactive too. Coal plants put out as much radioactive waste as nuclear plants do... but they put it straight into the air, and then put a bunch more into spent-fuel pools besides.
Re:A first for Canada: New type of nuclear plant opening by ...
by shawnz on Tuesday May 03, 2022 @10:02AM
(#31248440)
That's only if you look at the worst case of individual incidents. You also need to consider the rate of incidents (due to the hugely greater consumption of coal plants for example) and other failure modes like long-term mishandling of fuel and waste.