If we decide to get rid of nuclear and coal in favor of wind and solar, a millions of people will die of starvation. Our GDP would decrease by half. I'd rather take a "risk" that a nuclear reactor explodes or a coal mine collapses than the alternative. On Apr 2, 2012, at 4:16 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: > > Putting aside the long term perspective, .. . > > > You can’t dismiss the long term perspective. > > No, you can't, but I just did. My sentence begins "putting aside the long > term perspective" meaning "let's not talk about the future for a moment here; > let's look only at the present." > > > What happens in the future is important. > > Yes, it is. What happens in the present is also important. An accident that > bankrupts the biggest power company on earth and costs the Japanese taxpayers > several hundred billion dollars is important. > > > Your value system is completely opposite to what it should be on this issue; > let me explain. > > You don't need to. I made it quite clear that I agree that coal is a bigger > threat in the long term. However, nuclear power is a gigantic economic threat > in the short term. If 3 more Japanese reactors were to go out of control and > explode, it would paralyze the entire economy, which is of the third largest > in the world. It would be roughly the equivalent of the U.S. fighting the > Iraq war again, 5 times in a row. > > Coal threatens global warming which in the worst scenario will destroy entire > nations and kill millions of species and individual people. That's horrible. > But a disaster that would impoverish an entire nation -- 4 reactors exploding > -- is also horrible, albeit in a different way. Neither risk is acceptable. > Both coal and nuclear have to go. > > We need something better. I hope that cold fusion can overcome the academic > politics and replace them both, but if that is not to be, I am sure that > solar and various other methods can replace them. This will be more expensive > than coal per kilowatt hour (ignoring future costs). It will be far cheaper > than nuclear however, now that we have seen the true dollar cost of nuclear > power. After Fukushima it became the most expensive method of generating > electricity in history. I believe it wiped out all of the profits ever made > by TEPCO. > > Before Fukushima I supported nuclear power. I knew that nuclear accidents > have occurred and that they might be severe. However, I never imagined that a > reactor manufactured in the US and installed in Japan could malfunction to > this extent and cost this much money. If you asked me before 2011 I would > have said: "that that might happen in theory but in actual practice we should > not worry about such extreme scenarios." Before 9/11 I would have dismissed > the likelihood of fanatics crashing commercial airliners into buildings. Life > is full of surprises. > > - Jed >
