• GolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    9 months ago

    You’re right too. That’s why it’s a difficult question. But putting lives of millions at the risk of immediate death to save billions’ long term health is ehh kinda bad too. It’s my personal opinion though

    • InputZero@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Your personal opinion is wrong, I’m sorry I am being so brash but I don’t know how else to say it. The fly ash from fossil fuel combustion contains radioactive material that’s spread over an enormous area when it’s burnt. The amount of radioactive exposure we receive everyday from burning fossil fuels is orders of magnitude more than all the nuclear accidents combined. As counter intuitive as it is, closing nuclear power plants exposes the general public to more radiation not less.

      In my personal opinion, globally humanity should not be building very many new nuclear reactors. Admittedly there are certain applications that nuclear energy is the responsible choice. Renewable energy sources are the clear winner, safe, reliable. Closing the nuclear power plants we have will only accelerate climate change and in a roundabout way expose us to more radiation. I realize that nuclear energy is scary but the dangers we don’t immediately see from fossil fuels are worse.

      • smegforbrains@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        It’s not a question of either coal or nuclear. We have to get rid of both and that is exactly what’s happening in Germany at the moment. 2023 was the end of nuclear power production. 2038 is scheduled to be the end of coal power production and 2045 is scheduled to be the year of climate neutrality. Germany is one of eleven countries to have made this a law.

        • Hestia [comrade/them, she/her]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          It’s not a “personal opinion.” And your “opinion” is NOT of equal worth to factual information. You’re just trying to save face because you don’t like admitting when you’re wrong. Maybe find some factual information that backs up your perspective rather than just baselessly claim that nuclear reactors put “millions at risk of immediate death” and run away when you can’t back it up. All it takes is a quick google search to disprove how it puts “millions at risk of immediate death.”

          https://world-nuclear.org/nuclear-essentials/what-are-the-effects-of-nuclear-accidents.aspx

          • GolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            I have other things to do rather than “saving my face” on a random political forum. I commented using my own personal opinion and I didn’t ask for a discussion. Of course most of the people are going to disagree and they do have the right to do so. Also, everyone has their own moral beliefs and value of facts. Mine are just not common

            • CloutAtlas [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              17
              ·
              9 months ago

              Look, if your personal opinion of the moon is that it’s a hologram, it’s definitely worth less than, say, Buzz Aldrin’s opinion of the moon being made of rock.

              I don’t know who told you a personal opinion is worth exactly as much as someone else’s, but they were wrong.

              Giving value to bad opinions like “Oh Trump won we gotta storm the capitol” or “Vaccines cause autism” or “Nuclear is worse than coal” and refusing to engage with all evidence of the contrary and just leaving the conversation by saying “Mine are just not common” is an extremely unhealthy way to be a part of society. I live in Australia and the bush fires are getting worse. There’s a noticeable cost of lives and livelihoods. You’re not saving millions of lives from a nuclear meltdown by tearing down nuclear plants. You’re putting millions of lives in danger from climate disasters by tearing down nuclear plants.

              I hope you change for the better.

              • GolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                9 months ago

                I’d say I define a “personal opinion/belief” and a “scientific fact-proven piece of information” as different things. Personal opinions may be inspired by and dependent on religions, preferences, radical moral positions and other things (fact-proven information can be like that too but it’s different). Though I don’t know if it’s any right

              • GolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                Yes because I’m trying to be above the arguing masses. Though I do admit that I’m still not that good at it unfortunately

                • Hestia [comrade/them, she/her]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  Conflict avoidance does not make you better than the “arguing masses.” In fact, it is my opinion that it is quite pathetic to try to place youself above others and I’m getting radical centrist vibes from you.