|
/ Hathaway Weblog / Nuclear Power |
Every once in a while I come across a Slashdot comment that really makes me question my assumptions. This comment about nuclear power is one of them:
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=122339&cid=10286621
This comment is saying that burning coal for electrical power produces more cancerous and radioactive waste than nuclear power ever did. Also, another poster claims that radioactive material doesn't hurt plants or animals, only humans:
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=122339&cid=10286492
If there is any validity in those claims, we should be building reactors right now. However, looking over the list of accidents that have occurred at nuclear power plants reminds me of Homer Simpson:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclear_accidents
The nuclear and airline industries appear to have something in common: statistically, it's far safer and cheaper to use the new way, but the accidents are spectacular and instantly newsworthy, so people get scared and fall back to the old way. However, there is an important difference: as an individual, I can choose not to fly in a plane and not incur the risk; but if society decides to build more reactors, I have no way to move to a planet with no such reactors. Because there are regional and global risks, the decision must be nearly unanimous.
So if burning coal emits all that radiation, when will I start glowing in the dark? Spooky!
Comments
My main beef with Nukular isn't the possibility of creating prodigies like that documented by http://www.kiddofspeed.com/default.htm but the fact that it centralizes power generation, and makes it necessary to transfer power over great distances, which is wasteful.
I don't like it because it draws attention away from alternative, decentralized power sources like wind and solar power, and gives the national power utilities more power (in all senses).
