Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 44,682
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
How does the death not being directly linked with a particular energy source make it relevant to that PRODUCTION of that energy? Shall we include the mentally disabled people who were intentionally poisoned with radioactive material to see the results of the exposure in the death count for Nuclear Power? How about Hiroshima? Are you saying those deaths never happened?It's quite reasonable to look at the whole cycle. Does the death not being direct somehow make it not happen?The thing is insurance companies do not want to deal with large events. It's the same reason the government does flood insurance and earthquake insurance is a joke.
Coal outstrips nuke by 3 1/2 orders of magnitude. Nuke has the best safety record of any major source of power, coal has the worst. (Yes, nuke beats all your green options.)
Source please. And if it's the same mortality-rate-based figures you tried to fool people with last time, I'll be disappointed.
http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-source.html
Yeah, it's based on deaths so it doesn't allow you to pretend nuke is much more dangerous than it really is.Are you serious?! This is including material production? Did the study account for drunk drivers that may crash into the wind turbine's design engineer's car and kill him too?LP's link said:95000GW would have taken 43.7 million tons of steel and 82.7 million tons of concrete. 3% of one year of global steel production. 4% of one year of the world’s concrete production. Half of one year’s production in the US for steel. About 15 deaths if corresponded to half of one years metal/nonmetal mining fatalities. 0.1 deaths per TWh. If the metal and concrete had come from China about 2700 metal/nonmetal mining deaths per year for 5 times the amount of steel. 270 deaths to get the metal for the wind turbines. 1.9 deaths per TWh. These construction related deaths are amortized over the life of the wind turbines of 30 years. Other wind power deaths need to factor in dangers associated with working with very tall structures (50 stories tall) and with deep water work associated with building and anchoring offshore.
"Deaths by TWh by energy source" strongly implies during production of energy, not the 'dust-to-dust' cost starting back in the waning days of glaciation.
And don't get me started on the civilizations almost assuredly destroyed because of fusion and a star going supernova.
Your link is ridiculous!