Okay, but if this was a nuclear power plant we'd have a second Fukushima on our hands.
Nuclear powerplants are so safe that they've only had a handful of (admittedly disastrous and high profile) failures, and have killed less people per watt hour generated than even wind and solar power. Nuclear power is the safest, cleanest, most efficient form of green energy we can get right now. Yes, it can be dangerous if not managed properly. But Fukushima, Chernobyl, and Three Mile Island were not freak accidents. Deliberate mistakes were made that were known at the time and should be used as warnings to keep the industry safe, not as sirens that lead is to swear off nuclear energy.
Thank you for taking the time to write this. The disinformation around nuclear power is extremely damaging to humanity.
Not a problem. To me, nuclear power is the answer to the mantra of "technology will solve the climate crisis," and we've had it for years, yet we're too afraid to use it!
But Fukushima, Chernobyl, and Three Mile Island were not freak accidents.
Fukushima involved bad mistakes and a set of freak accidents. It was hit first by a the most powerful earthquake ever recorded in Japan and then by a tsunami.
Now sure, there are plenty of mistakes they made that seem obvious in hindsight. But, it's fundamentally different from Three Mile Island and Chernobyl where the only causes were design and operational mistakes.
That is fair, I would call that a bit of perspective, bit not unfair perspective. Yes, it did take significant disasters to make the mistakes apparent, so who's to say if anybody would've noticed or how much of a problem they would've been.
Yeah. In hindsight a nuclear power plant in a country with frequent earthquakes has to be hardened against earthquakes. Earthquakes can cause tsunamis so any plant on the coast has to be ready to handle tsunamis. Tsunamis come a while after earthquakes, so they have to be prepared for the double whammy of an earthquake with a tsunami just a short time later. And, to be fair, it's not like they hadn't thought of those things at all. It's just that they made some design mistakes that seem obvious in hindsight.
But, it's still significantly better than power plants that just melt down completely on their own due to incompetent design and incompetent operations, with no triggering natural disaster.
Nuclear power plants are an affront to God. The only nuclear power plant we need is the Sun.
You could say that about all of our technology. What are we supposed to do? Run around gardens wearing fig leaves and talk to snakes while eating apples?
Are you suggesting that coconuts are migratory?
Well they are designed to ride the ocean currents in search of a new home
You might be on to something there.
I mean if I had more body confidence, I’d be down for a quick jaunt through a garden.
No one can stop you (if you run fast enough)!
This is officially the worst argument yet. Who cares about what some fake god thinks, we have to deal with our own very real issues around power generation and anthropogenic climate change.
How could you speak such blasphemy on this Holy Saturday‽ After all, what did Jesus on the cross resemble, but a solar panel on a telephone pole?
KenM, is that you?
It's good to have fun on Lemmy.
Satan Satan Satan
Dead baby Jesus
Satan Satan Satan
What is more hellish than the core of a nuclear power reactor?
Other people.
Centralia, PA.
Fine, don't use power from nuclear reactors. You can sit in the dark with your bronze age book and talk about how actual positive steps forward are an affront to an ideology from back when people thought the sun rose because it was pulled by a chariot across the sky.
God's holy light will drench our solar panels and our LCDs will be forever illuminated with the Good News that He Is Risen. Happy Easter!
Religion: god makes universe and everything in it but gets pissed when you try to use it. You have to guess which things piss god off.
*citation needed
It's not my job to educate you.
No no, this should be easy. Which Bible passage mentions Nuclear Power? Which Bible? Which Faith?
If you're making a claim, it is your job to back that claim up.
Ezekiel 25:17. "The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of the darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy My brothers. And you will know I am the Lord when I lay My vengeance upon you."
I don't see any mention of Nuclear Fission Reactors. Even the passage claiming Pi equals exactly 3 is more straight forward.
I'm trying real hard to be the shepherd.
Yeah, but I know what shepherds use their flocks for.
Ah yes, fission power plants, famously vulnerable to average thunderstorms.
This television film was inspired by a real-life near disaster that had taken place on June 24. 1998, when an F2 tornado hit the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station in Ohio resulting in the loss of off-site power. Despite that, the film bears no resemblance to the actual events at Davis-Besse.
I've seen that one! I vaguely remember not being blown away, but also thinking it wasn't as terrible as I was expecting going into it.
and famously resilient in the event of a bombing, or direct plane strike, or PWR depressurization.
Yeah no, they're built like fucking rocks, because they are one.
I mean, we all saw how well one of them held up to a tidal wave
You realize that thunderstorms are unrelated to tsunamis?
Take a minute and rethink this comment.
Take a minute and rethink this comment.
I mean, we all saw how well one of them held up to a tidal wave
Nowhere in the first comment did the poster claim that tidal waves and thunderstorms are related.
Maybe you came in after CrimeDad made their comment.
I can understand the confusion.
Done. No change in my position. In what way do you think that thunderstorms (a weather phenomenon caused by atmospheric conditions) and tsunamis (a wave caused by an earthquake or large underwater landslide) are related?
I mean, we all saw how well one of them held up to a tidal wave
Where did the original comment say that they were related?
You made something up.
If you feel like it's relevant I guess that's your choice.
What are tsunamis, but thunderstorms of the sea?
what are thunderstorms but the ocean of the sky?
Now you're getting it!
well, no, because the sky is the ocean of the sky.
I like the way you think!
Lol concrete and steel doesn't give a shit about hail
Sounds like something Big Concrete and Steel would say.
They wouldn't say anything.
And they'd make sure you didn't either.
Real Boeing hours
they'd say that, because they're right.
Believe it or not, the hot stuff is behind meters of concrete and lead plates. Hail isn't going to do shit. And with it's lack of active fault lines, Texas would be fine for Nuclear.
It's not the hail, it's the hubris.
you'd have a second Fukushima if it was operated by complete fuckwits like you probably.
The entirety of fukushima was fuck up after fuck up after fuck up. "lets build a nuclear reactor on the bay of a tsunami prone location" "hey boss our backup generators are weather tight. Oh well, that's not important anyway" "hey boss those weather sealed doors that we never fixed let tsunami water get in, and now the generators aren't running" "hey boss, we can't get out to fukushima because the tsunami fucked up the infrastructure to get there."
"hey boss, we evacuated everybody form the nearby area, but we forgot about wind, so we accidentally evacuated everybody to an area with more prominent radiation." "hey boss, it turns out there was zero lasting effects as far as we can tell medically, from fukushima, notably with people living in the area nearby, having slightly elevated levels of health issues, however still below the average expected"
Okay, but if this was a nuclear power plant we'd have a second Fukushima on our hands.
Nuclear powerplants are so safe that they've only had a handful of (admittedly disastrous and high profile) failures, and have killed less people per watt hour generated than even wind and solar power. Nuclear power is the safest, cleanest, most efficient form of green energy we can get right now. Yes, it can be dangerous if not managed properly. But Fukushima, Chernobyl, and Three Mile Island were not freak accidents. Deliberate mistakes were made that were known at the time and should be used as warnings to keep the industry safe, not as sirens that lead is to swear off nuclear energy.
Thank you for taking the time to write this. The disinformation around nuclear power is extremely damaging to humanity.
Not a problem. To me, nuclear power is the answer to the mantra of "technology will solve the climate crisis," and we've had it for years, yet we're too afraid to use it!
Fukushima involved bad mistakes and a set of freak accidents. It was hit first by a the most powerful earthquake ever recorded in Japan and then by a tsunami.
Now sure, there are plenty of mistakes they made that seem obvious in hindsight. But, it's fundamentally different from Three Mile Island and Chernobyl where the only causes were design and operational mistakes.
That is fair, I would call that a bit of perspective, bit not unfair perspective. Yes, it did take significant disasters to make the mistakes apparent, so who's to say if anybody would've noticed or how much of a problem they would've been.
Yeah. In hindsight a nuclear power plant in a country with frequent earthquakes has to be hardened against earthquakes. Earthquakes can cause tsunamis so any plant on the coast has to be ready to handle tsunamis. Tsunamis come a while after earthquakes, so they have to be prepared for the double whammy of an earthquake with a tsunami just a short time later. And, to be fair, it's not like they hadn't thought of those things at all. It's just that they made some design mistakes that seem obvious in hindsight.
But, it's still significantly better than power plants that just melt down completely on their own due to incompetent design and incompetent operations, with no triggering natural disaster.
Nuclear power plants are an affront to God. The only nuclear power plant we need is the Sun.
You could say that about all of our technology. What are we supposed to do? Run around gardens wearing fig leaves and talk to snakes while eating apples?
Are you suggesting that coconuts are migratory?
Well they are designed to ride the ocean currents in search of a new home
You might be on to something there.
I mean if I had more body confidence, I’d be down for a quick jaunt through a garden.
No one can stop you (if you run fast enough)!
This is officially the worst argument yet. Who cares about what some fake god thinks, we have to deal with our own very real issues around power generation and anthropogenic climate change.
How could you speak such blasphemy on this Holy Saturday‽ After all, what did Jesus on the cross resemble, but a solar panel on a telephone pole?
KenM, is that you?
It's good to have fun on Lemmy.
Satan Satan Satan
Dead baby Jesus
Satan Satan Satan
What is more hellish than the core of a nuclear power reactor?
Other people.
Centralia, PA.
Fine, don't use power from nuclear reactors. You can sit in the dark with your bronze age book and talk about how actual positive steps forward are an affront to an ideology from back when people thought the sun rose because it was pulled by a chariot across the sky.
God's holy light will drench our solar panels and our LCDs will be forever illuminated with the Good News that He Is Risen. Happy Easter!
Religion: god makes universe and everything in it but gets pissed when you try to use it. You have to guess which things piss god off.
*citation needed
It's not my job to educate you.
No no, this should be easy. Which Bible passage mentions Nuclear Power? Which Bible? Which Faith?
If you're making a claim, it is your job to back that claim up.
Ezekiel 25:17. "The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of the darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy My brothers. And you will know I am the Lord when I lay My vengeance upon you."
I don't see any mention of Nuclear Fission Reactors. Even the passage claiming Pi equals exactly 3 is more straight forward.
I'm trying real hard to be the shepherd.
Yeah, but I know what shepherds use their flocks for.
Ah yes, fission power plants, famously vulnerable to average thunderstorms.
I so rarely get to reference this "so bad it's good" made-for-TV movie: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_Twister
I've seen that one! I vaguely remember not being blown away, but also thinking it wasn't as terrible as I was expecting going into it.
and famously resilient in the event of a bombing, or direct plane strike, or PWR depressurization.
Yeah no, they're built like fucking rocks, because they are one.
I mean, we all saw how well one of them held up to a tidal wave
You realize that thunderstorms are unrelated to tsunamis?
Take a minute and rethink this comment.
Take a minute and rethink this comment.
Nowhere in the first comment did the poster claim that tidal waves and thunderstorms are related.
Maybe you came in after CrimeDad made their comment.
I can understand the confusion.
Done. No change in my position. In what way do you think that thunderstorms (a weather phenomenon caused by atmospheric conditions) and tsunamis (a wave caused by an earthquake or large underwater landslide) are related?
Where did the original comment say that they were related?
You made something up.
If you feel like it's relevant I guess that's your choice.
What are tsunamis, but thunderstorms of the sea?
what are thunderstorms but the ocean of the sky?
Now you're getting it!
well, no, because the sky is the ocean of the sky.
I like the way you think!
Lol concrete and steel doesn't give a shit about hail
Sounds like something Big Concrete and Steel would say.
They wouldn't say anything.
And they'd make sure you didn't either.
Real Boeing hours
they'd say that, because they're right.
Believe it or not, the hot stuff is behind meters of concrete and lead plates. Hail isn't going to do shit. And with it's lack of active fault lines, Texas would be fine for Nuclear.
It's not the hail, it's the hubris.
you'd have a second Fukushima if it was operated by complete fuckwits like you probably.
The entirety of fukushima was fuck up after fuck up after fuck up. "lets build a nuclear reactor on the bay of a tsunami prone location" "hey boss our backup generators are weather tight. Oh well, that's not important anyway" "hey boss those weather sealed doors that we never fixed let tsunami water get in, and now the generators aren't running" "hey boss, we can't get out to fukushima because the tsunami fucked up the infrastructure to get there."
"hey boss, we evacuated everybody form the nearby area, but we forgot about wind, so we accidentally evacuated everybody to an area with more prominent radiation." "hey boss, it turns out there was zero lasting effects as far as we can tell medically, from fukushima, notably with people living in the area nearby, having slightly elevated levels of health issues, however still below the average expected"