Skip to main content

View Diary: Odds of Dying by Terrorist Attack: 20,000,000 to 1 (246 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I for one (3+ / 0-)

    look forward to your post on the topic, Roadbed Guy.


    if you're guaranteeing Fourth-Generation Reactors,

    I might be persuadable.  James Hansen is.  Bill Gates too.

    •  No, if they're even better, great (3+ / 0-)

      For now I'm just going on the historical record, in which case nuclear has an absolutely stellar record compared to other major forms of electricity generation:

      The NASA researchers combined this information with historical energy generation data to estimate how many deaths would have been caused if fossil-fuel burning was used instead of nuclear power generation from 1971 to 2009. They similarly estimated that the use of nuclear power over that time caused 5,000 or so deaths, such as cancer deaths from radiation fallout and worker accidents. Comparing those two estimates, Kharecha and Hansen came up with the 1.8 million figure.

      They next estimated the total number of deaths that could be prevented through nuclear power over the next four decades using available estimates of future nuclear use. Replacing all forecasted nuclear power use until 2050 with natural gas would cause an additional 420,000 deaths, whereas swapping it with coal, which produces significantly more pollution than gas, would mean about 7 million additional deaths.

      link

      For a more statistical comparison, look here

    •  If we did those and shut down all other reactors (0+ / 0-)

      not compliant with such a high standard, I'd consider supporting it.

      Low "risk" of directly-caused death, but what's the price of the uninhabitable zone around the Chernobyl reactors? Around the Fukushima Daichii reactors? And then there was the very real chance of an even bigger accident.

      Even if the risk is orders of magnitude less than it is already but not zero, if what's at risk is sufficiently catastrophic, we shouldn't build it or allow it to continue to exist.

      The corresponding terrorism argument is one of them setting off a nuclear weapon. The argument isn't quite the same there, though—the answer isn't unmitigated global crackdown on terrorism. The best answers are decommissioning nuclear weapons, unwinding the American empire, prioritizing nuclear materials security, etc.

      Government and laws are the agreement we all make to secure everyone's freedom.

      by Simplify on Fri Jun 14, 2013 at 12:46:55 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site