this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2024
956 points (86.4% liked)

Science Memes

11081 readers
3234 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 25 points 15 hours ago (3 children)

TBF a nuclear incident is not like burning just one house down. It’s burning down the whole city and making it unusable for a decade or ten.

[–] Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca 5 points 8 hours ago

Why not build it in a remote location then?

Dams can also produce a lot of hydroelectric power, and a catastrophic failure could also destroy an entire town or more. We just don't build dams upstream of a large town.

[–] jaschen@lemm.ee 10 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

While 100% true for nuclear, the current state of burning fossil fuels is much MUCH worse.

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 2 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Yes. Over the long term it will render the planet uninhabitable, or at least close enough to it.

[–] jaschen@lemm.ee 3 points 8 hours ago

Some experts would argue it's already starting to be uninhabitable.

[–] OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml 6 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

I think a town burning down would be fatal for most the inhabitants 3000 BC

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 1 points 15 hours ago

Yes, maybe… but the point being they could, and often did, rebuild right where they’d been before. Radiation prevents that.