Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinordi
I don't like to consider myself a fear mongerer. I'm interested from the perspective of the future of the nuclear industry. I had believed that nuclear will factor greatly as we inevitably move to decarbonize our energy systems in light of climate change. But this is really concerning.
|
And it'll have an impact on the public opinion too, rightly or wrongly. Decisions about future reactors could be impacted based on fear, rather than a good evaluation of these reactors vs. planned reactors.
I still think nuclear is the only option we have right now.
And part of the problem too is it's so easy to fall into the nirvana fallacy. Yes these accidents are terrible, but when people say "no nuclear", people rarely mean "no nuclear instead of x", they just mean no nuclear vs some imaginary world where the electricity will still be there, without considering how many people die from coal, how much radioactive waste and toxic materials are released into the atmosphere burning coal and the impact of that, or forgetting about oil accidents, etc.
Every form of energy will have an impact, every industrial enterprise will cost lives, everything has waste byproducts. The question isn't how good something is compared to no impact, it's how good is it compared to the alternatives.