HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Science » Science (Group) » Absorption of Sulfur Diox... » Reply #3

Response to OAITW r.2.0 (Reply #2)

Fri Jan 31, 2020, 12:22 AM

3. I am tired of and bored with discussions of Fukushima, which are intellectually and morally absurd.

Between six and seven million people die every year from air pollution.

How is it that everyone wants to talk endlessly about Fukushima and not at all about 70 million people who die every decade from dangerous fossil fuel waste?

How many people died from radiation at Fukushima again?

The event was an earthquake. Twenty thousand people died from seawater and collapsing buildings destroyed by seawater. How come no one ever questions why buildings failed? They certainly killed more people than radiation in the same event that destroyed the reactors.

In fact, including the Indian Ocean Tsunami in 2004, over 250,000 people have been killed by seawater from tsunamis.

If we are so concerned about Fukushima, why are we not equally concerned with coastal cities, asking why we have them.

As for distributed energy and solar enerpgy talk, I have no use whatsoever for distributed energy, because I've looked into the matter at a very deep level. I used to think solar energy was a good idea. I changed my mind. (I personally think anyone who cannot change their mind is too flawed to be in any position of power, take that Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders!)

The most successful and wildly used distributed energy device, by far, is the automobile, which has killed millions of people in the last half a century, the same half a century in which commercial nuclear power operations have operated. Automobiles kill with accidents; they kill with their waste products, they kill with the run-off of the distributed pollution they inevitably become and the distributed pollution they produce in operation, oils, greases, lubricants, and asphalt.

Distributed energy is ultimately distributed pollution. I wouldn't dream of putting a solar cell on my roof, because I know how they work, what they are made of, what goes into their manufacture and what their fate will be.

Will it be easier and more straight forward to clean up the planetary atmosphere than it is to "clean up" 80,000 tons of used nuclear fuel, if in fact we wanted to "clean up" nuclear fuel because we insist on the bad thinking that doesn't see it as a resource?

In twenty or twenty five years, all the solar cells now on roofs will be another part of what is the second or third worst waste profile in the world right now, after dangerous fossil fuel waste and polymer waste, electronic waste. Of course, all the people buying solar cells and batteries will not have the responsibility of cleaning up the mines, the factories, and the waste that all this stuff generates. It's just more garbage to be dumped on future generations as an expression of contempt for our children, our grandchildren and their great, great, great grandchildren. Your twenty years of "off grid" heaven is not superior to the lives of every other human beings who will come after us.

From my perspective, it is immoral to "go off grid" and I have very little patience for people congratulating themselves for embracing this bourgeois affectation. The extraordinarily low energy to mass ration of so called "renewable energy" clearly delineates it as an environmental disaster waiting to happen.

For the record, the explosion at the Mitsubishi trichlorosilane plant in 2004 instantaneously killed more people than died of radiation immediately or within the last ten years, from the effects of radiation release as the natural disaster at Fukushima which showed, once again, that coastal cities, with and without nuclear power plants are not absolutely "safe." Trichlorosilane is a key intermediate in the manufacture of solar cells and many other similar electronic devices. I note that the solar industry, despite half a century of cheering for it is trivial, and were it ever to get to ten exajoules per year of the 600 exajoules per year that humanity is now consuming, these disasters would be far more prevalent than the unacceptable level at which they already exist. The solar industry is perceived as harmless precisely because it is trivial. On scale its environmental drawbacks would be impossible to ignore.

Now, 19,000 people will die today from air pollution. They would not have died were it not for the selective attention that declares than ten or twenty or even a thousand deaths from radiation in abnormal excursions, are infinitely more important than tens of millions of deaths from the normal operations of dangerous fossil fuel power plants, production plants and distributed energy devices propelled by dangerous fossil fuels.

Please do not ask me about Fukushima ever again. It is asking me to validate selective attention. I am not willing to engage in that discussion again, because I am a scientist, and because I care about the future and my contempt for such a conversation would be belied by engaging in such an absurd conversation.

Any money spent to make nuclear energy "safer" is wasted money, since there are literally thousands of far more risky and deadly activities on which the same amount of money could be spent saving millions of lives that are lost for inattention. Two billion people on this planet lack access to basic sanitation. Hundreds of thousands die of disease transmitted by fecal waste. Which would save more lives, 20 billion dollars making nuclear energy "safer" or 20 billion dollars installing septic systems for those lacking them?

Nuclear energy need not be perfect, it need not be without risk, it need not address the ersatz concerns of people who in fact know nothing about it, to be vastly superior to everything else. It only needs to be vastly superior to everything else, which it is.

Have a nice day tomorrow.

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 6 replies Author Time Post
NNadir Jan 2020 OP
captain queeg Jan 2020 #1
NNadir Jan 2020 #6
OAITW r.2.0 Jan 2020 #2
LineLineNew Reply I am tired of and bored with discussions of Fukushima, which are intellectually and morally absurd.
NNadir Jan 2020 #3
OAITW r.2.0 Jan 2020 #4
NNadir Jan 2020 #5
Please login to view edit histories.