Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor
It's a fair point. Even if a nuclear accident doesn't kill anyone, it can still be catastrophic if it renders a region uninhabitable.
Though the problem with nuclear isn't the danger; it's the cost. There's a reason basically no one is building them anymore (I think there has been 1 new plant in the entire US brought into operation in the last 25 years) and why they take decades to build (the newest plants all started construction in the '70s).
|
No it is not a fair point at all?
AFC quite simply said they "don't personally give a toss about death toll"
How can you have a rational debate about the best forms of energy for us when one person wants to simply remove the death toll impact from the discussion all together?
That's not a fair position, as I said, its a horrific position.
This doesn't mean AFC's other points don't have merit, I never said that.