We can't run a regular coal or natural gas power plant here without fucking it up and getting people killed. Despite the safety of modern plant designs, I do NOT trust the people in charge here with fissile material.

[–] Strykker@programming.dev 13 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Go lookup CANDU reactors, we have designs already that can't steam explode themselves and instead will fail safe. Also just to be clear nuclear reactors don't perform a nuclear explosion if they fail, the Chernobyl explosion was a steam explosion that threw nuclear material into the air.

[–] scoobford@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 year ago

The level of incompetence I've grown to expect of my state government would suggest that they'd have fissile material delivered and stored in a leaky shed, where it will create runoff which contaminates the local reservoir, before a crackhead steals it, takes it to the scrapyard, and it is never seen again.

[–] Sizzler@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 year ago

Or we could just use solar with none of those risks but still using the largest nuclear reaction around.

[–] captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago

...and rendered an area the size of a county unsuitable for humans for hundreds of generations.

You're going to have to show me a government that isn't half-full of people who hate education, who hate science, and most of all who hate accountability before I vote for more nuclear power.

[–] The_Lopen@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You know, the beautiful thing about being a society is we can all just agree to regulate them. I think that's called a government.

[–] scoobford@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Like I said, we can't/won't effectively regulate the power plants we have now.

Our government is only good for generating moral panics and building roads. I hope that changes one day, but it has been getting worse for a long time, so I won't hold my breath for it to all be fixed tomorrow.

[–] The_Lopen@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

That's fair, I wasn't giving you the benefit of the doubt, that's my bad

[–] frezik@midwest.social 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yes, but when things go wrong, the boom is relatively small and contained.

Not so: https://daily.jstor.org/the-tragedy-at-buffalo-creek/

[–] Michal@programming.dev 4 points 1 year ago

That's why people prefer driving over flying, right? If something goes wrong, the boom is small and contained.

Never mind that planes are much safer and efficient at travelling long distance.