I still don't understand, this is a list of accidents so what? How many people are injured/died? How does that compare to other sources of energy, other sectors? How many of these were due to human incompetence and how many where due to natural disasters that killed more than the resulting nuclear accident? How old are all these plants? If we would iterate on the design of these reactors how safe can we get them after 1000 plants?
> And to compare them with coal plants is classical whataboutism. "They can't be bad, because I found something other that's bad as well."
I disagree, I am saying we should replace coal with something that is orders of magnitude safer. Nation who will disregard nuclear will be stuck with coal/nat gas for a very long time. For most of the world there aren't even theoretical models for getting to 100% wind/solar if stable grid is required with CURRENT demand, let alone future demand.
I don't have a source handy but I disagree we only have supply until 2080. Maybe with current known reserves and without reprocessing.
Germany won't find a story site because they don't want to find one. They are looking for something perfect, that is guaranteed to last 1000s of years. Meanwhile, waste water from mining and refining is just dumped in old quarries, lakes, the ocean. PFAS just gets dumped everywhere. All kinds of toxic waste that lasts forever, just dumped no one cares. But when its about nuclear waste suddenly everything has to be secured against the apocalypse.
Look we can argue about this forever, meanwhile China is building more plants that whole west combined and in a few decades they will be energy independent using 100% clean energy.
They are only expensive because externalities of other solutions are not captures or are subsidised. Wind and solar are expensive if battery storage is included in most of the world.
Waste is mostly a solved problem. Much more solved that waste management for coal plants in any case (whom also produce a lot of radioactive waste in addition to producing tons and tons of co2)
We have more than enough uranium. Currently only a small fraction is economically mineable but we have played that game before with oil.
Serious question, when has there been a serious nuclear accident? Fukushima was caused by a natural disaster that killed far more people than the nuclear failure did. Chernobyl was pure communist stupidity. This level of incompetence would never happen in a well functioning country. So that leaves Three Mile island?
Meanwhile coal kills millions each year (mostly the old and children).
And what are these predictable green alternatives? Only hydro is reliable and is heavily restricted by geo. We’d need massive breakthroughs in battery technology to make solar and wind reliable in most of the world (by population).
Look up historical weather patterns days with no sun and no wind, you need massive, massive amounts of energy storage.
What do you mean? 2021-22 was peak of the employment market. At least here in Europe. To get a job all you had to do was be breathing. It was insanity. SQL was and still is highly relevant. Especially in data related fields.
Yes, exactly. It works great. But it is not cookie cutter enough for most orgs to adopt which is what led to Scrum, SAFE and what else. And then organisations take those frameworks (often change them to get even more agility out) and adopt them like it is gospel.
I have worked at an org where team members were not allowed to create tickets because that was the scrum master's job and the product owner had to approve all tickets etc. Who can even think that is a good idea??
Not sure what the solution is. There might not be any.
I am unfamiliar with Wero. Can you explain why it is an engineering fiasco?
Side note: Looking at their job listings I don't see any engineering positions (with the exception of a security engineer which is a grey area in a bank IMO), only managers and business roles.
I can recommend doing this! It really is not hard to learn the basics of electronics and you will have a better understanding of how the things around you work.
I read the “The Art of Multiprocessor Programming” and I don’t recommend it. It is very theoretical. There is no mention of practical performance considerations on real hardware.
Large parts of the theory focus on lock-free and wait-free data structures. Which, while interesting, are not necessary for beginners.
> And to compare them with coal plants is classical whataboutism. "They can't be bad, because I found something other that's bad as well."
I disagree, I am saying we should replace coal with something that is orders of magnitude safer. Nation who will disregard nuclear will be stuck with coal/nat gas for a very long time. For most of the world there aren't even theoretical models for getting to 100% wind/solar if stable grid is required with CURRENT demand, let alone future demand.
I don't have a source handy but I disagree we only have supply until 2080. Maybe with current known reserves and without reprocessing.
Germany won't find a story site because they don't want to find one. They are looking for something perfect, that is guaranteed to last 1000s of years. Meanwhile, waste water from mining and refining is just dumped in old quarries, lakes, the ocean. PFAS just gets dumped everywhere. All kinds of toxic waste that lasts forever, just dumped no one cares. But when its about nuclear waste suddenly everything has to be secured against the apocalypse.
Look we can argue about this forever, meanwhile China is building more plants that whole west combined and in a few decades they will be energy independent using 100% clean energy.