Hacker News Reader

Comment by wateralien | Hacker News Reader

Mmmm, I think that would be a mistake. The former residents of Fukushima prefecture and Chernobyl would probably agree.

Mortality rate in deaths per thousand terawatt hour[1]:

  - Brown coal:  32.72
  - Coal:        24.62
  - Oil:         18.43
  - Biomass:      4.63
  - Natural gas:  2.82
  - Hydro:        1.30
  - Wind:         0.04
  - Nuclear:      0.03
  - Solar:        0.02

Again, these are adjusted per 1000TWh, and includes nuclear catastrophes like Chernobyl and Fukushima

1: https://www.statista.com/statistics/494425/death-rate-worldw...

Nominally it includes Chernobyl. Caveat, noby, not in the USSR, the successor states nor the West ever really counted the Chernobyl victims, hence the official.number of what, 30-ish victims.

The hydro stats are mainly due to the Banqiao case, which is a fluke: in similar conditions anything would go boom with way less latency: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35521090

do you know if the solar ratio includes falling off roofs?

- 20.000 died because of the Tsunami. - 2.000 died in the evacuation attempt. - ONE person died because of actual radiation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disa...

Then we can discount all people being hurt from falls when building solar plants because the panels themselves did not kill them, they just did not follow OSHA regulations!

Solar = 0.0!

Why don't we abolish the Price–Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act and see how far nuclear gets when having to pay the true cost for their insurance?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price%E2%80%93Anderson_Nuclear...

Are you implying that if there was no Nuclear plant in Fukushima, the Tsunami would not have happened, or the people living there wouldn't have been needed to be evacuated?

Tsunami? Yes. Evacuatiom due a nuclear melt down of a non-existing nuclear power plant? I don't know, but maybe not.

Show me a general solar or wind solution that works just about anywhere that is guaranteed to have at least 1 week of back up power when the power takes a nose dive during extreme weather or even just when the wind/solar dips, even 1 day would be a great improvement over what we have now. I would be onboard with solar/wind all day if this was true.

The solution is clear. Ban tsunamis.

"In 2012, ex-prime minister Naoto Kan was interviewed about the Fukushima nuclear disaster, and has said that at one point Japan faced a situation where there was a chance that people might not be able to live in the capital zone including Tokyo and would have to evacuate ((...)) If things had reached that level, not only would the public have had to face hardships but Japan's very existence would have been in peril"

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_reaction_to_Fukushima...

An absurd counterfactual. This was assuming a scenario in which Fukushima released a ridiculously high level of radiation, which it didn't, that would necessitate other nuclear power plants to be immediately evacuated with nothing done to shut down their reactors resulting in a "chain reaction" of other plants releasing radiation presumably from the engineers just running away and letting a meltdown take place. Absolute FUD and bullshit since this would be an incredibly irresponsible thing to do and the Japanese people are far too competent and conscientious to enact such a hare brained evacuation.

Stop spreading disinformation please.

At the time of the Fukushima disaster no one could assess in real-time, and therefore according to the then-prime minister the worst case scenario was worked on. You can call it 'disinformation' (in other words: 'he is a liar'!) without any source all day, those are hard facts.

But the millions killed each year by pollution created burning gas, oil and coal would strongly disagree - if they were still alive.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com