←back to thread

1041 points mpweiher | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
m101 ◴[] No.45230060[source]
I think a good exercise for the reader is to reflect on why they were ever against nuclear power in the first place. Nuclear power was always the greenest, most climate friendly, safest, cheapest (save for what we do to ourselves), most energy dense, most long lasting, option.
replies(25): >>45230185 #>>45230223 #>>45230479 #>>45230658 #>>45230757 #>>45231144 #>>45231518 #>>45231738 #>>45232518 #>>45232615 #>>45232756 #>>45232757 #>>45232937 #>>45233169 #>>45233513 #>>45233762 #>>45233817 #>>45233825 #>>45234181 #>>45234637 #>>45234828 #>>45235394 #>>45238856 #>>45240108 #>>45243016 #
tiberius_p ◴[] No.45230757[source]
I remember the anti-nuclear fever went viral in 2011 after the Fukushima nuclear accident caused by the Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami. I think the correct lesson to be learned from that experience is not to built nuclear power plants in places where they can be damaged by natural disasters...and not to call for all nuclear power plants around the world to be shut down.
replies(4): >>45230783 #>>45231182 #>>45231987 #>>45233694 #
makeitdouble ◴[] No.45231987[source]
> in places where they can be damaged by natural disasters.

And places where they can be damaged by human actions as well.

That leaves so many places to build reactors, right ?

replies(1): >>45234864 #
tiberius_p ◴[] No.45234864[source]
I think human actions are easier to predict and prevent than natural disasters. Earthquakes are the biggest deal breakers.
replies(1): >>45237046 #
1. makeitdouble ◴[] No.45237046[source]
Current Ukraine would beg to differ.