Vivek Ramaswamy: The problem w/ nuclear energy isn’t that it’s not good enough. It’s that it’s *too good* at solving the problem: “climate change” could no longer be a vector for other agendas that have nothing to do with climate.

submitted by [deleted] from twitter.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Hel 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

But there’s no way we could possibly prevent the extreme human error that occurred with much less safe reactors nearly 40 years ago or not build plants in tectonicly active regions/tsunami flood plains

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[deleted]

    [–]Hel 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Actually.. you just missed the obvious sarcasm, but I’m glad you agree nuclear energy is safe

    [–]Alienhunter 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    I mean before the war Chernobyl was basically a tourist attraction. Not that it's not dangerous still but the danger is greatly exaggerated.

    I remember watching some Netflix show called "Dark Tourist" the guy is on some bus towards Fukushima and freaking the fuck out before he turns around and goes back because the "excessive radiation" was something like 0.1 milisilverts or something like that and the guy was like "omg numbers I don't understand! Turn this bus around fight now!" And all the other paid actors that were supposed to be "tourists" were like "yeah it's too dangerous let's go back!".

    As if someone who has paid thousands of dollars on a trip to the otherside of the world to go see a nuclear disaster zone is gonna get freaked out because the giger counter is showing slightly higher radiation than normal? Lol no shit of course it's going to show radiation it's a fucking nuclear disaster zone you retards. My god.