Instead of talking about propaganda, you should go check the sources you're telling other people to check.
South Korean energy does cost circles around subsidized wind and solar, and doesn't need ridiculous battery infrastructure.
Gen-3 PWR nuclear is, in reality, by far the cheapest form of power on Earth, and you'll never find any hard evidence from respectable sources saying otherwise. (Probably that's why you're poisoning the water with claims of lobbies and bingo cards.)
.
> There's risks that don't show up in neat, averaged numbers
No, there aren't. Nuclear has killed fewer people all of in history than any other form of power generation in its worst month. Almost no industry in human history, power generating or otherwise, has a human death safety record anywhere near as good as nuclear power's. (I can't think of a single specific counter-example. Can you?)
The worst nuclear disaster in history, Kyshtym, which most people have never even heard of, didn't kill as many people as a bad bus accident.
Please bring hard evidence with your next set of claims. No, I don't mean estimates from the 80s by non-doctors that never panned out.
.
> think Russia shelling a nuclear plant in 2022
Zero deaths. You wouldn't expect that from other forms of power plant being shelled.
Your examples work against you.
There's a reason why when we talk about deaths from other forms of power we talk about actual deaths, but when we talk about deaths from nuclear power, we talk about risk that hasn't occurred and what might maybe happen someday
If you look at the numbers, and say "yes, but in my imagination," then you're doing the wrong thing
You say "check your sources" but you haven't actually done that yourself, yet
You talk about "advertising from nuclear lobbies" but nuclear fans' sources tend to be the government
Instead of talking about propaganda, you should go check the sources you're telling other people to check.
South Korean energy does cost circles around subsidized wind and solar, and doesn't need ridiculous battery infrastructure.
Gen-3 PWR nuclear is, in reality, by far the cheapest form of power on Earth, and you'll never find any hard evidence from respectable sources saying otherwise. (Probably that's why you're poisoning the water with claims of lobbies and bingo cards.)
.
> There's risks that don't show up in neat, averaged numbers
No, there aren't. Nuclear has killed fewer people all of in history than any other form of power generation in its worst month. Almost no industry in human history, power generating or otherwise, has a human death safety record anywhere near as good as nuclear power's. (I can't think of a single specific counter-example. Can you?)
The worst nuclear disaster in history, Kyshtym, which most people have never even heard of, didn't kill as many people as a bad bus accident.
Please bring hard evidence with your next set of claims. No, I don't mean estimates from the 80s by non-doctors that never panned out.
.
> think Russia shelling a nuclear plant in 2022
Zero deaths. You wouldn't expect that from other forms of power plant being shelled.
Your examples work against you.
There's a reason why when we talk about deaths from other forms of power we talk about actual deaths, but when we talk about deaths from nuclear power, we talk about risk that hasn't occurred and what might maybe happen someday
If you look at the numbers, and say "yes, but in my imagination," then you're doing the wrong thing
You say "check your sources" but you haven't actually done that yourself, yet
You talk about "advertising from nuclear lobbies" but nuclear fans' sources tend to be the government