This seems totally unbelievable to me. I’m not doubting your sincerity, but where did you get this fact? Solar power has enough problems of its own, but I don’t know about this one.
They handle it in the worst way possible? Do they bake it into cupcakes and feed it to orphans? Why would the regulators insist that they handle the high-level waste poorly?
malden
Deaths from falls are the #1 cause of non-motor vehicle accidents in the U.S. I’m at work today and don’t have access to my reference materials, but I guarantee you that the addition of millions of rooftop solar collectors, which would have to be maintained and cleaned, would be a very significant factor in the number of accidental deaths per year.
SingleDad: I get your point, but I’ve been fighting this battle for a couple of decades and I call 'em like I see 'em. Anyway, I think it might be the right approach. Call them on their tactics.
For instance, the average person has an incredibly inflated notion of the actual damage done at Three Mile Island. Why? Because when it happened, anti-nuke activists seized upon it and started spreading wildly exaggerated claims. Television specials and movies made it look like one of the worst ecological disasters of the modern age. It’s a version of the Big Lie. Make something up, and repeat it often enough, and eventually people will accept that it’s true.
Regarding the safety of Nuclear Power: somewhere I read that burning coal releases radioactive uranium and thorium into the atmospere, and that this radioactivity is actually of a higher level than that released by the nuclear plants. In addition, burning coal produces fly ash, which causes lung cancer. Is this true? If so, why aren’t the environmentalists pushing nuclear power?
I also favor more nuclear power. But regarding Chernobyl, the poor design of the reactor was not the main problem. The problem was the bozos who were operating it. They removed more manual control rods than were ever supposed to be removed. This after they intentionally disabled the emergency core cooling system.
You guys always want sources, so here is a link:
http://www.uilondon.org/cherntim.htm
Coal plants release more radiation into the atmosphere than the NRC maximums, by quite a lot. I think the primary contributor is radon gas.
Didn’t Chernobyl also lack a concrete containment vessel?
dhanson said:
I don’t doubt that this is true, and I’m frankly glad that I’m not a miner. But I frequently see this point made in discussions about nuclear power, and I wonder how different things will be in a uranium mine.
And I’m asking because I don’t know, I’m not trying to make a point.
Nuclear power as practiced in this country is neither safe nor reliable. You have the environmentalist wackos on one hand, and the overwhelming greed of the government subsidized utilities on the other. The wackos drive up the costs with their incessant clamor for studies and regulations and oversight. Then the subsidized utilities are promised a minimum return on investment thru excessive rate structures. It behooves them to spend as much as possible in exchange for this government guaranteed return which then translates into more dollars in their bottomless pockets.
This alone is responsbible for the massive costs of each power plant, each one designed and built differently that the one before for the sole purpose of increasing construction costs, rather than building them in a proven cookie cutter type system.
::