You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
-13 points

Until something goes wrong and it is not safe and controlled anymore. You know, because of the whole exponential chain reaction thing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

So do you still believe in bloodletting to cure colds or the earth being 10,000 years old?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

or the earth being 10,000 years old?

Humanity, or at least written scripture, is roughly 10,000 years old. So if you take humanity = earth, then yes it’s approximately true. But also, it’s an incredibly egoistic viewpoint because earth is not just humanity.

Edit: by humanity, I mean human culture and not so much human biology.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

so basically, if you define a leaf as a caterpillar, it’s basically the same thing, got it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

My parents have witnessed not one but two nuclear catastrophes in their lifetime. Wtf are you talking about?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

how many cancers have they witnessed from the likes of coal power? Or things like asbestos? Shit like arsenic, or worse, lead. They probably have a significant IQ drop from leaded fuel, assuming they’re american.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points

Sure, nuclear energy is valid and all, but you sound like an absolute spanner…

If you want to argue that nuclear energy has its place, maybe don’t ridicule people who remember how much of an issue the last major nuclear meltdown was (and partially is).

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
*

N stiwtosotsotskgsgms

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Fukushima has barely any fall out though, does it. And the nuclear energy sector is moving towards even safer methods with SMRs that are self contained and just can’t have a runaway reaction AFAIK

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Nuclear plant accidents have happened tho. Remember Fukushima? It was 13 years ago, not that long. It didn’t strait up explode like a nuclear bomb, and neither did Chernobyl, but still; contamination is a pretty big deal. You can argue that the risk isn’t that bad or that fossil energy plants also have risks; but you can’t just dismiss it as a superstition.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

You get much more radiation and excess deaths from Coal and Natural gas plants than Fukushima and Chernobyl, it’s just that it’s not as obvious as it happens slowly over time.

In fact there are more deaths caused by wind energy sources than nuclear energy sources.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Modern reactor designs have no such problem, hence the reference to ancient science.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Fukushima? It was 13 years ago, not that long. It didn’t strait up explode like a nuclear bomb, and neither did Chernobyl, but still;

fukushima was a BWR design, put on the coast of a place known for having tsunamis, and wasn’t properly equipped with emergency generators (they flooded, oopsies) which they couldn’t get to, in order to service the reactor, due to the roads being fucking yeeted.

Literally any other plant on earth is going to have a better outcome.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

The idea of an explosion is. That’s what this thread is about. It’s not just about meltdowns, which, like you said, is very low risk, and lower than ever from what we’ve learned in the past.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

meltdowns do not resemble bombs at all. nor are they really possible either.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

On a world where everybody is effraid of nuclear power, station safety is really overboard, and nuclear is super safe.

If everyone accepted nuclear power the same way we accept cars, then you can be sure capitalism would cut corners on nuclear safety…

(Source: many of my clients are nuclear power plants people)

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

If everyone accepted nuclear power the same way we accept cars, then you can be sure capitalism would cut corners on nuclear safety…

and yet, cars keep getting safer, and safer every year, they also keep getting larger, and more expensive and harder to repair, but they do get safer.

Interesting.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

sure, like corners are cut in every industry including renewables (which have a higher accident rate even). yes a nationalized nuclear power program is less perversely incentivised. if you look at countries where nuc is accepted more you wont find insane accident rates nor are plants bombs.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

To be complete, you can’t ignore the dangers of nuclear power plants in a war setting. It sucks but it is what it is.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Station safety is so overboard, that we only had like three meltdowns or so, and only some hundreds of thousands of people killed by premature cancer deaths as a result of them and some million or so permanently displaced.

But surely after the next event we will have learned and then it will be totally safe. Like they said after Three Miles Island. And like they said after Chernobyl. And like they said after Fukushima.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*

That must be why it’s still advised to not collect and eat wild mushrooms in parts of southern Germany.

Also I didn’t say they resembled bombs.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

did i claim chornobyl didnt have any effects or are you just searching for stuff to argue about?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

that’s the thing though, the exponential chain reaction isn’t possible.

The problem is that when fuel breaks the strictly controlled fuel rod environment, it stops being cooled properly, and regulating it becomes more interesting (not impossible, there are some clever solutions out there, look at metal cooled reactors for example) and as a result, the spicy particle generation tends to break containment, which is why we have things like PCVs, which contain the corium long enough to at least prevent the elephants foot troll, which is then contained by the secondary containment (the building around it) which is also contained by the rest of the building, surrounding the containment building.

It’s pretty hard to fuck up a reactor. Even harder when the idle state of the reactor is safe, as is with metal cooled reactors. Those are some of the most promising designs, because you can literally just do nothing with them, and nothing bad happens.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Science Memes

!science_memes@mander.xyz

Create post

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don’t throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

Community stats

  • 11K

    Monthly active users

  • 3.7K

    Posts

  • 93K

    Comments