Perfection is the enemy of good enough
![]
https://www.statista.com/statistics/280704/world-power-consumption/ https://ourworldindata.org/renewable-energy
Syndicated from the fediverse. Read and engage on the original instance.
View original on pawb.socialView original on pawb.social
8 replies
We call that useful fuel
Good luck with mining waste.
There is no such thing as a pure iron, coal or rare earth mine.
There is also radioactive waste when you burn coal or make renewables. But if you properly go nuclear, you eventually develop fast neutron reactors which can burn the most radioactive waste types.
erm... I mean sure but if slight imperfection implies severely poisoning a large geographical area and its ecosystems for thousands of years you might want to be really really sure about your capabilities.
Not looking to fearmonger or anything. Just keeping this in mind instead of assuming there's no substance to the argument helps push towards caution. Even if nuclear is the best choice, be safe about it, you know?
Its perfectly safe to live in the Ukraine exclusion zone, the danger is mostly the Russians. Average exposure would be about 0.002 mSv a day or .73 mSV a year aka way less than places like :
Guarapari, Brazil: Coastal beach sands rich in monazite produce local external radiation readings up to 175 mSv per year (with isolated spots much higher).
Kerala and Tamil Nadu, India: Coastal strips feature thorium-rich monazite sand deposits yielding high background doses.
Yangjiang, China: High natural terrestrial gamma radiation averages around 2 to 6 mSv per year.
Yes it is technically polluted but its not actually that bad.
erm...
Yes? You'll have far greater exposure on average living in a major city....https://www.epa.gov/radiation/radiation-sources-and-doses
I think this is what OPs message is. There's no silver bullet that solves everything and change will be gradual. Making any incremental improvements to our fuel consumption which has a net positive effect to reduce climate change is a good thing.
Gen IV reactor designs are incapable of going into thermal runaway, but Chernobyl and Fukashima weren't, which is how they became a cautionary tale and resulted in better designs. It's like basing your fear of flying on airplane disasters from the 1950's, and instead driving, which is even more dangerous. Just like unsafe airplanes from long ago, upgrading to safer designs is needed. In order to do so, new reactors need to be built to handle the load, but get blocked because of the fear of another Chernobyl, which just leaves older reactors around that are actually a concern.