@MataVatnik to Science [email protected]English • 11 hours agoAnon questions our energy sectorslrpnk.netimagemessage-square123arrow-up1508arrow-down179cross-posted to: [email protected]
arrow-up1429arrow-down1imageAnon questions our energy sectorslrpnk.net@MataVatnik to Science [email protected]English • 11 hours agomessage-square123cross-posted to: [email protected]
minus-square@MataVatnikOPlinkEnglish7•2 hours agoLook up deaths per kWHr of different energy sources and come back to me
minus-square@WoodScientistlinkEnglish1•56 minutes agoIt has that low death rate precisely because it is heavily regulated. The typical nuclear booster argument works on the following circular logic: “Nuclear is perfectly safe.” “But that’s not the problem with nuclear. The problem with nuclear is its too expensive.” “Nuclear is expensive because it’s overly regulated!” “But nuclear is only safe because of those heavy regulations!” “We would have everything powered by nuclear by now if it weren’t for Greenpeace.”
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish2•2 hours agoThat’s not my point and I’m already aware.
Look up deaths per kWHr of different energy sources and come back to me
It has that low death rate precisely because it is heavily regulated.
The typical nuclear booster argument works on the following circular logic:
“Nuclear is perfectly safe.”
“But that’s not the problem with nuclear. The problem with nuclear is its too expensive.”
“Nuclear is expensive because it’s overly regulated!”
“But nuclear is only safe because of those heavy regulations!”
“We would have everything powered by nuclear by now if it weren’t for Greenpeace.”
That’s not my point and I’m already aware.