• FishFace@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    Different but wrong. I am always interested to know what people’s guesses are for the total number of deaths caused by Chernobyl, because it’s remarkably low in my opinion. It’s by far the safest form of energy generation. Yes, even safer than wind power… why? Simply because wind is a very energy un-dense source of energy so you need to do a lot of construction to obtain it, and construction is a somewhat dangerous job - there’ll be some small number of people who fall off wind turbines (or off rooves while installing solar panels, or whatever) and the huge number of turbines works out as swamping the small number of nuclear plants and tiny number of deadly nuclear disasters.

    • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      Different but wrong. I am always interested to know what people’s guesses are for the total number of deaths caused by Chernobyl, because it’s remarkably low in my opinion.

      There were roughly 350,000 innocent human beings who had to abandon their homes due to Chernobyl. The death total was only so low because hundreds of thousands of people had to literally flee for their lives.

      • FishFace@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        20 hours ago

        Ah guess we should kill more people and build something else then!

        Having said that, my numbers are out of date; solar is now safer.