Quote:
Originally Posted by Skybird
People falling from high places...? Radioactivity...? Compare...???
Sorry, you travel alone in that orbit. I mean nobody calculates the lethal accidents during bicycle assembly to make it an argument against green traffic policies.
|
Ok, to recap, lets say we have a coal powerplant.
Over a given period of time it would release more radioactivity into the environment due to small concentration of radioactive materials in coal that is being (nearly) constantly burned, than a nuclear power plant, even if we account for the risk of nuclear power plant accident with release of radioactivity.
When spread over the entire industries this leads to coal power generating more radioactivity in our environment than the nuclear power, even with TME/Chernobyl/Fukushima and other (less dramatic) incidents being accounted for.
This means that the fear of radioactive polution by nuclear power being used as an argument against nuclear power (and for coal power - if I recall correctly that is what Germany replaced it's nuclear power generation in short term) is not based on factual reality.
Do you get this argument? Or is it also otherworldly for you?
As to lives - installation and maintenance of wind power killing men (most workplace deaths are male) at a rate higher than nuclear power (even if we account for incidents with radioactivity release ie TME/Chernobyl/Fukushima) shows that the fear of human losses is also not a rational argument in favour of wind power over nuclear power, as it is not backed by numbers.