EU court rules nuclear energy is clean energy

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.

The reason to be against nuclear energy is quite simple - human error.

Unlike flying, we’ve not shown nuclear energy to be sufficiently idiot-proof for many people to be comfortable with it. That and the fact that radiation is invisible, which makes it somehow almost paranormal.

The main problem of course is that coal is killing much more people than any nuclear disaster ever did (per unit of energy delivered).

But because it’s so spread and so normalised and not so bombastic, we don’t even consider it.

The number of lives saved by using nuclear energy is easily in the tens of thousands even with disasters like Chernobyl.

Although of course it has to be stated that the USSR moved to heaven and earth to solve the problem… and if they hadn’t, then the entire continent might be dead today.

And brown bears are less dangerous than cars because fewer people are killed by them. If you see a car, RUN. They are dangerous. Brown bears, not so much. Go ahead, pat their fur, statistically this is safe.

It’s important to understand the qualifier per unit of energy.

The correct parable for you would have been the number of bear deaths vs interactions with bears weighed against number of car deaths vs interactions with cars.

You mean, number of deaths per incident? Yeah, that makes sense.

With that logic, we should put 100.00% of all public funding into protecting us against world ending asteroids.