Nuclear Disasters = DFF #392
Added 2022-05-06 17:00:10 +0000 UTCThe livestream has ended and the episode is now available for all patrons. https://youtu.be/6R6wDoxXyf4
Comments
How many acres of land are completely uninhabitable for the foreseeable future due to wind and solar?
Phoebe Ophie
2023-05-25 19:23:09 +0000 UTCWhen was the last time a wind or solar plant made an entire area completely uninhabitable?
Gregory Darnell
2023-05-11 16:22:45 +0000 UTCEven including Chernobyl, nuclear power has less deaths than wind and solar. To be against it is essentially a religious position. No matter what the data says, your dogma trumps all.
Jaron Talotta
2023-02-13 05:23:13 +0000 UTCOk I'll accept that it's to dangerous but knowing that I now must accept that we are already fucked because there are tons of these things all over the world and we all know they aren't going anywhere.
J Allen
2022-12-07 06:32:58 +0000 UTCI've always thought it was highly dangerous but completely safe if handled correctly. Turns out, you can't, and the accidents last for longer than the span of the current human civilization. Its terrifying to think about what happens to a planet full of these things that gets hit by a stray asteroid or two.
PixelCrusader
2022-05-14 12:54:18 +0000 UTCOr the chat is right.
David
2022-05-10 13:55:34 +0000 UTCAt first I thought it was people just wanting to trigger TJ for entertainment value, and it still might be, but I'm coming around the the idea that much of the chat really is just irresponsible suicidal and ignorant. Which is fine.
Ian Salyers
2022-05-10 13:08:07 +0000 UTCGet em TJ
Jonathan Jones
2022-05-09 23:34:40 +0000 UTCA rare episode where the chat was in the right, Entertaining but you guys still got some ass backwards views on nuclear energy
DarnChaCha
2022-05-09 20:28:10 +0000 UTCI only live about 40 minutes away from TMI
Ryan Z
2022-05-09 13:43:18 +0000 UTCExcept hindenberg didn't make an entire zone uninhabitable for years. 🤣 You're a dumbass
Barnasuss
2022-05-09 13:34:30 +0000 UTCNuclear power has come a long way since Chernobyl. The choice of which technology is best to generate power for a given time, place, purpose, and available financing is complex. But it seems like you guys aren't ready for any data to convince you that nuclear power can be safe. I understand how much propaganda is spewed by the energy industries. But this conspiracist thinking is particularly unfortunate given that nuclear has unique pros that can make it a logical next step in transitioning away from hydrocarbon fuel based energy, at a time when global heating is a particularly pressing form of environmental degradation. I don't just mean low cost per watt or emissions per watt. There are a lot of unique uses for the byproducts of nuclear power, like life-saving nuclear medicine. You guys should do a deeper dive in comparing energy sources.
cyrus
2022-05-09 13:29:17 +0000 UTCIt is. It has the lowest deaths per kWh of any power source. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-deathprint-a-price-always-paid/?sh=4255b299709b
Д-SPEC
2022-05-09 08:55:20 +0000 UTCSaying nuclear power is dangerous because of Chernobyl is like saying air travel is dangerous because of the Hindenburg. Just as flying is still the safest form of travel, nuclear is the safest form of power.
Д-SPEC
2022-05-09 05:18:26 +0000 UTCThese nuclear plants will outlive humanity.
steven decke
2022-05-08 09:16:40 +0000 UTChttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPBzj90Su8A
Stewart Thompson
2022-05-08 01:09:13 +0000 UTCI'm sure nobody in these comments has been thoroughly brainwashed by the very same industry and government entities that go out of their way to cover this incidents up.
Mazy
2022-05-08 00:56:44 +0000 UTCSolar, wind, hydropower, and geothermal exist.
PESSIMIST PRODUCTIONS
2022-05-07 14:05:07 +0000 UTCI have now realized that the use of a dangerously powerful energy source is also the plot of the new doom games and this was probably what they were alluding to when they wrote it.
Sam Charles
2022-05-07 12:06:49 +0000 UTCReally weird that these guys are anti nuclear when its the only way to produce power besides fossil fuels. Barely anyone dies in most of these nuclear disasters. They keep portraying power plants like theyre nukes.
Usman
2022-05-07 10:51:05 +0000 UTCI hate you
Usman
2022-05-07 10:46:16 +0000 UTCTime to join the trigger cycle, I guess. I am a physicist who works with those medical isotopes you mentioned. The pessimists are correct about the inherent dangers of Uranium/Plutonium reactors BUT fission reactors using Thorium (which already exist!) and fusion reactors (still in development) do not have these drawbacks. Call me a conspiracy theorist, but it seems that governments are only interested in building the kind of nuclear plants that can make fuel for weapons.
Ben Martin
2022-05-07 10:29:32 +0000 UTCYou guys should try doing a dff asmr episode sometime. Maybe critiquing asmr while you whisper? This would most definitely only appeal to me.
Carcinogenz
2022-05-07 06:50:21 +0000 UTCThese are the scientists who will run your ministry of truth.
Brendon Morrice
2022-05-07 02:38:42 +0000 UTC#DownWithNetNeutrality
Atticus Omundson
2022-05-07 01:22:50 +0000 UTCI live about 15 miles away from the worst nuclear disaster site on US soil, Rocketdyne’s Santa Susana Field Lab west of Los Angeles… most people don’t know about it, it’s been thoroughly buried in mainstream discussion, numerous lawsuits have been quashed, settled, or are still being litigated. You can look it up though. The facts are there. I’ve had family friends die from cancer due to the site, and we have some of the highest rates of lethal childhood/teen cancer in the country. I highly suggest to everyone wanting to discuss the viability of nuclear power to contrast it with the horrible responsibility of our government bodies and take a seriously loooong pause about whether you think it’s a good idea still with who runs our utilities… It’s a fucking bad idea.
The Beekeeping Bumblebee
2022-05-07 01:09:13 +0000 UTCAnd fossil fuels, like coal, release radioactive isotopes, which end up in your body when you breathe them in. But unlike the odd nuclear disaster, it's a constant stream of radiation. Replacing every coal plant with a nuclear power plant would be a massive success for bodily health, even when including the instances and potential for further nuclear meltdowns.
David
2022-05-06 22:50:14 +0000 UTCYeah, it definitely wouldn't have been as good if it wasn't live.
PESSIMIST PRODUCTIONS
2022-05-06 22:28:24 +0000 UTCGreat episode! Loved the back and forth with chat lmao
DancingQueen
2022-05-06 22:25:04 +0000 UTCOh yay more brain-dead nuclear propaganda safer than any other reliable power source
Darian James
2022-05-06 22:03:32 +0000 UTCI am more worried about coal plants than a nuclear disaster.
David
2022-05-06 22:02:10 +0000 UTCNuclear Power is completely safe.... Except when it isn't :p
Skeptical Jesus
2022-05-06 21:56:30 +0000 UTCKinda gotta agree with Shoe that nuclear is the only environmentally friendly way to produce power. Simply down to the fact that solar, wind, and hydro are all variable in output and require a backup generator, which in most cases is gas burning. Nuclear is the only solution (other than a dramatic increase in battery technology) to fully rid us of fossil fuel burning.
Maximillion Bongs
2022-05-06 20:32:45 +0000 UTC“nUcLeAr iS tHe sAfEsT”
Butt turd saw sidge
2022-05-06 17:53:50 +0000 UTCI've been doing a ton of research on this topic over the past month. Chernobyl, the Devil's Core, the Elephant's Foot and the Kyshtym disaster are terrifying.
Jonathan M
2022-05-06 17:03:10 +0000 UTC
