While we're at it how about why apply the same standard to coal and natural gas plants? For some reason when we start taking about nuclear plants we all of a sudden become adverse to the idea of unfunded externalities but when we're talking about 'old' tech that has been steadily irradiating your community and changing the gas composition of the entire planet it becomes less concerning.
Realistically speaking, nuclear power is pretty safe. In the history of nuclear power, there were two major incidents. Considering the number of nuclear power plants around the planet, that is pretty good. However, as those two accidents demonstrated, the potential fallout of those incidents is pretty severe and widespread. I think this massively contributes to the perceived risks. The warnings towards the public were pretty clear. I remember my mom telling stories from the time the Chernobyl incident became known to the public and people became worried about the produce they usually had from their gardens. Meanwhile, everything that has been done to address the hazards of fossil based power generation is pretty much happening behind the scenes.
With coal and natural gas, it seems like people perceive the risks as more abstract. The radioactive emissions of coal power plants have been known for a while and the (potential) dangers of fine particulate matters resulting from combustion are somewhat well known nowadays as well. However, the effects of those danger seem much more abstract and delayed, leading people to not be as worried about it. It also shows on a smaller, more individual scale: people still buy ICE cars at large and install gas stoves into their houses despite induction being readily available and at times even cheaper.
> However, the effects of those danger seem much more abstract and delayed, leading people to not be as worried about it.
Climate change is very visible in the present day to me. People are protesting about it frequently enough that it's hard to claim they are not worried.
Climate change is certainly visible, although the extend to which areas are affected varies wildly. However, there are still shockingly many people who have a hard time attributing ever increasing natural disasters and more extreme weather patterns to climate change.
Granted, that is a valid concern if power outages are more frequent in your area. I have never experienced a power outage personally, so that is nothing I ever thought of. However, I feel like with solar power and battery storage systems becoming increasingly widespread, this won't be a major concern for much longer
They aren’t frequent but in the last 15-16 years there have been 2 outages that lasted almost 2 weeks in some areas around here. The first one was in the winter and the only gas appliance I had was a set of gas logs in the den.
It heated my whole house and we used a pan to cook over it. When we moved the first thing I did was install gas logs, gas stove and a gas water heater.
It’s nice to have options and backup plans. That’s one of the reasons I was a huge fan of the Chevy Volt when it first came out. I could easily take it on a long trip but still averaged 130mpg over 3 years (twice). Now I’ve got a Tesla and when there are fuel shortages it’s also really nice.
A friend of ours owns a cybertruck and was without power for 9 days, but just powered the whole house with the cybertruck. Every couple of days he’d drive to a supercharger station to recharge.
Sure, we can have a carbon tax on everything. That's fine. And then the nuclear plant has to pay for a Pripyat-sized exclusion zone around it. Just like the guy said about Tesla. All fair.
