←back to thread

1041 points mpweiher | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
aussiegreenie ◴[] No.45227784[source]
Nuclear power is clean but VERY EXPENSIVE.

Dispatble solar and wind are about 1/5 the price of new nuclear.

replies(2): >>45229346 #>>45230128 #
m101 ◴[] No.45230128[source]
It is expensive because we choose to make it expensive. It is regulation pushing safety levels far beyond other industries, and far beyond science (radiation is far less harmful than regulatory models suggest)
replies(1): >>45230588 #
LinXitoW ◴[] No.45230588[source]
You do NOT get to constantly taut the low mortality rates of nuclear AND call for less regulation at the same time.

But even from a very matter of fact point of view, I'd rather have 1000 people die every year for 20 years, than have 20.000 people die on a single bad day/week. The economic and social impact is far, far bigger when it can't be "spread out" over multiple years.

replies(2): >>45231556 #>>45231666 #
m101 ◴[] No.45231666[source]
Do you even know anything about the relative death rates historically? You should look it up.
replies(1): >>45232971 #
Kon5ole ◴[] No.45232971[source]
That's faulty logic, it's like claiming nuclear bombs were safe until Hiroshima.

We know nuclear reactor accidents could potentially kill millions of humans, even it hasn't done so yet.

replies(1): >>45234410 #
1. m101 ◴[] No.45234410{3}[source]
Even in survivors of nuclear blasts only 3% died because of the effects of radiation