Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

moniss

(7,938 posts)
1. As soon as the nuclear power industry can
Thu Aug 14, 2025, 02:46 PM
Aug 14

demonstrate an absolutely "never can fail" system, which is an impossibility because all systems fail at some point, and can demonstrate safe "never to be a risk" disposal of the waste then and only then should the world embrace nuclear power on a large scale.

Three Mile Island was safe. Until it wasn't. Chernobyl was safe. Until it wasn't. Fukushima was safe. Until it wasn't. The SL-1 reactor was safe. Until it wasn't. Windscale, Kyshtym and on and on. We have been fortunate so far that only tens of thousands of square miles of land has been contaminated and only hundreds of thousands of people having to be evacuated. That is with the limited population of reactors so far. Dramatically increasing that population, along with the certainty of accidents being when not if, is a foolhardy endeavor and all the economic calculations about energy production costs don't take into account the estimated costs for future "oops" occurrences both in immediate and long term damage consequences.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»An Economic Argument That...»Reply #1