For the most part, this is a good, informative video about the advantages of nuclear energy.

Then, at 9:00 they talk about the danger of nuclear weapon proliferation. Obviously, this is a scary subject and requires scary footage. Guess what they chose?

Nuclear weapons test footage?

No.

Muslims praying.

Marg Bar The Economist.

    • GrandAyatollaLenin [he/him,comrade/them]
      hexagon
      ·
      edit-2
      4 years ago

      Fukashima was technologically safe, but then it broke. The technology to prevent such damage to the reactor does exist. Sea walls and inland regions have existed for centuries, and most nuclear reactors use them.

      Fukashima is addressed in the video actually (which I'm assuming you didn't watch).

      • carbohydra [des/pair]
        ·
        4 years ago

        The video had like 3 irrelevant sentences about Fukushima, not sure what you mean? If such preventative technology existed, why didn't they use it? Besides the "human factor", it's almost like technology only exists within the economic system that decides whether to devote resources to it. 🤔

        And then there's the building time. By the time we finish any new "safe" plants, would not the window for averting runaway climate change have passed anyway?

        • GrandAyatollaLenin [he/him,comrade/them]
          hexagon
          ·
          edit-2
          4 years ago

          The points they made:

          -The actual reactor failure only killed one person

          -Nuclear power is the safest of any reliable power supply

          -Compared to coal usage, nuclear power generation has saved millions of lives

          -Nuclear would have done more, had it not been for misguided environmentalist concerns

          Existing plants need to be kept open for one.

          Second, while new plants are major projects, they can be completed within the timeframe it will take to phase out coal. Wether that's fast enough is another question, but late is better than never.

          Finally, even after a transition away from fossile fuels, nuclear power will be worth investing in. A reliable, constant power supply will always be better than a variable one (even with tons of batteries).

          • carbohydra [des/pair]
            ·
            4 years ago

            I guess the key is comparing it to coal then.

            Only measuring immediate explosion deaths gives me "gomulizm killd 100 gorillion" vibes, it still caused massive environmental destruction, which affects human health as well.