Nuclear power is too safe
jackdevanney.substack.com
Nuclear power is too safe
1–10 of 201 posts
Re: Nuclear power is too safe
#2That’s backwards: it actually means that protecting against nuclear hazards is astronomically expensive, that nukes are borderline unmanageable in the long term
Re: Nuclear power is too safe
#3If you think maintenance is expensive you should try an incident.
Re: Nuclear power is too safe
#4That’s backwards: it actually means that protecting against nuclear hazards is astronomically expensive, that nukes are borderline unmanageable in the long term
Yeah, that was not what I read in that text.
The point the author is trying to get accross is that nuclear is being made unnecesarily expensive. Not nececarily expensive like you seem to claim with no substantiation.
Re: Nuclear power is too safe
#5That’s backwards: it actually means that protecting against nuclear hazards is astronomically expensive, that nukes are borderline unmanageable in the long term
We have had very few nuclear hazards in the past, with very limited impact as shown in this article. Nuclear plants that were really old rarely failed as well, before we added all this regulatory overhead. Weird how something "borderline unmanageable" causes way less damage than the alternatives.
Re: Nuclear power is too safe
#6If nuclear power was invented today, it would have been considered a breakthrough capable of changing the course of climate change dramatically. Since it exists for long and people formed an emotional reaction to incidents that were not that serious, while dying constantly from things they cannot see (like air pollution from coal), we are in this weird scenario where otherwise educated people say absolutely stupid things and refuse to see the evidence.
Yes, nuclear is way too safe. Regulations keep piling on, adding costs and construction time, with no measurable benefit other than political expediency.
Re: Nuclear power is too safe
#7If you think maintenance is expensive you should try an incident.
This. Any serious malfunction is likely shutting down your block on the order of months to for good.
Re: Nuclear power is too safe
#8It would be really, really nice if we lived in a world where people new nuclear power mostly just means heating water (like many methods of power generation…)
Re: Nuclear power is too safe
#9LOL. He laments how billions are spent for nuclear reactor safety and then uses the casualty numbers based on those billions being spent [1], to calculate the casualty impact of building nuclear factories with more abandon and without such spending (as if the numbers would be the same).
Also hidden in the small print, the assumption that future accidents would be "no worse" that previous ones. Because, you know, that's a given or something.
Not to mention that even the numbers he uses for casualties from prior accidents and later cancers are doctored by governments who had accidents on their watch trying to look good, and by research funded and astroturfed by the nuclear industry to make itself look better.
Re: Nuclear power is too safe
#10It would be really, really nice if we lived in a world where people new nuclear power mostly just means heating water (like many methods of power generation…)
Yeah, heating water with radioactive material. And then having to dispose toxic byproducts that can kill millions for thousands of years.