Asklemmy

42493 readers

1443 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
[email protected]: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

156

Why has the world started to mine coal again? (lemmy.ml)

submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

182 comments fedilink hide all child comments

With climate change looming, it seems so completely backwards to go back to using it again.

Is it coal miners pushing to keep their jobs? Fear of nuclear power? Is purely politically motivated, or are there genuinely people who believe coal is clean?

Edit, I will admit I was ignorant to the usage of coal nowadays.

Now I'm more depressed than when I posted this

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago (2 children)

            
              Fukushima
Chernobyl
3-Mile Island
to name a few

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Yes yes, we know people don't understand statistics.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I'm looking forward to seeing your Instagram snaps once you move back to pripyat permanently. Statistics never tell the full story.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago

Ah yes, the clusterfuck of the 20th century is the lode stone

Also Pripyat isn't that bad.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago (2 children)

If you're referring to the nukes-are-statistically-safe argument, then to be fair, you also have to take into account the scale of their failures.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago

Right it would be something involving number of people harmed, for number of joules or watt-hours of energy produced. How much injury, death, etc is there on a per-unit basis. That would be how you'd get a probability of harm. Then you could compare it numerically with other forms of energy to see which is the safest, statistically speaking.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

Time to start dismantling wind turbines then? https://www.statista.com/statistics/494425/death-rate-worldwide-by-energy-source/

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I want to add, it also take a while to get it going and the upfront costs are several billions of dollars. There also needs to be some kind of training or something to get the right personnel.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

And it’s a long project that will span multiple administrations, leading to low certainty of project completion. As long as it’s a political wedge issue the support can’t be relied upon throughout the project.