• duxbellorum@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    And people’s age and background has so weirdly much to do with how they internalize nuclear safety risk. My best german friend is very opposed to fossil fuels and believes in much stronger renewable focus, but is absolutely opposed to nuclear and basically laughs about how stupid he thinks that risk is. It’s wild.

    Especially when you realize how little impact Chernobyl and Fukushima really had. Even including those two accidents, coal plants have emitted vastly more radioisotopes (which occur naturally at low levels in coal, but since we burn such vast quantities of coal…) and vastly more carcinogens.

    • zik@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It doesn’t really matter whether you think nuclear energy is risky or not - it’s economically the worst option. It’s the most expensive of all the main sources of power. It’s much cheaper to just transition to a mix of mostly renewable power and plenty of places have already done it with success. So why do something unnecessary like nuclear when it’s more expensive than the alternatives?