Deceptichum@quokk.auM to US News@ponder.catEnglish · 3 days agoAgeing nuclear plant in Florida at risk from climate crisis, advocates warnwww.theguardian.comexternal-linkmessage-square8fedilinkarrow-up121arrow-down10cross-posted to: climate@slrpnk.net
arrow-up121arrow-down1external-linkAgeing nuclear plant in Florida at risk from climate crisis, advocates warnwww.theguardian.comDeceptichum@quokk.auM to US News@ponder.catEnglish · 3 days agomessage-square8fedilinkcross-posted to: climate@slrpnk.net
minus-squarereddig33@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up3arrow-down1·2 days agoBut nuclear is “safe”! And “clean”! /s
minus-squareJohnDClay@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up1·2 days agoIt actually is though. Even counting Chernobyl it has fewer deaths per kwh than wind energy.
minus-squarereddig33@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up0·2 days agoThen I guess Florida has nothing to worry about. I’ve never heard of wind energy killing anyone. Did someone fall off a turbine while servicing it or something?
minus-squareJohnDClay@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up3·2 days agoYeah that’s the most common case. It’s big construction, so there’ll always be some hazard there. Solar is a little lower than nuclear, presumably because you don’t need to work with heights. https://www.statista.com/statistics/494425/death-rate-worldwide-by-energy-source/
But nuclear is “safe”! And “clean”!
/s
It actually is though. Even counting Chernobyl it has fewer deaths per kwh than wind energy.
Then I guess Florida has nothing to worry about. I’ve never heard of wind energy killing anyone. Did someone fall off a turbine while servicing it or something?
Yeah that’s the most common case. It’s big construction, so there’ll always be some hazard there.
Solar is a little lower than nuclear, presumably because you don’t need to work with heights.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/494425/death-rate-worldwide-by-energy-source/