2024-05-03
Given that the green transition seems to be in deep trouble for lack of resources (amongst much else), why the reluctance to develop nuclear?
Because it's dangerous.
But given that so much of what we have been taught (climate change, pandemics, quaxxines) is now being challenged and indeed found wanting by many, should we not be reviewing the supposed dangers of nuclear radiation from nuclear plants seriously? Is this danger really as great as we suppose?
Well, I don't know, but it does seem that governments around the world are taking different views on this, given the panicked rush to renewables isn't working out too well, and that France seems to have made an adequate job of running its electricity supply on nuclear, to the point where it can export this power to other countries.
And alongside recently surfaced testimony from old-timers that the nuclear danger has been greatly over-hyped, we now have this article from John Droz Jr suggesting much the same thing.
Now I'm not saying that we should throw caution to the winds, but in the circumstances, maybe some re-evaluation of the true risks might be appropriate.
As always, this boils down to "whom can we trust"?
Make of it what you will.
See also: How Dangerous is Nuclear (2) ?
