realistic ecology wrote:Flytox wrote:If so, they [the Chinese] will understand before us the importance of the security of the populations before all other commercial considerations etc ...
But the Chinese have fully understood the importance of people's security. They have cheap coal, but they still invest in nuclear power without economic necessity. Why? Because they know how much coal
harms health and kills : about 500 Chinese die from it every year.
How many Chernobyls to achieve this result?
You justify the Chinese choice by compatibilizing / adding the dead to the dead. You are in the blindness of the economic problem which in itself justifies all the bad choices / alternatives cans more toxic than the others for the health and life of the population.
To limit the "damage" of the population (of our biotope in general), one of the most "reasonable" solutions would be to first drastically and quickly limit our consumption of carbonated energy, nuke etc ... Counting the dead does not that distracts attention from the real problems, our society does not know / do not want, yet to do without orgies of energy wastage.
realistic ecology wrote:One of the reasons for developing nuclear power in China is precisely the safety of populations, since, including accidents, nuclear energy is one of the least dangerous energies, extremely less dangerous than coal.
So the groundhog, she puts the chocolate in the aluminum foil ....
realistic ecology wrote:Should we go to demonstrate in front of the Chinese embassy so that it closes all its nuclear sites?
No, rather elect politicians capable of managing the real problems ... (here we are not out of the hostel yet ...
)
realistic ecology wrote:
Or should we congratulate China on reducing its CO2 emissions, its deadly pollution, by replacing coal with nuclear?
Congratulate one of the biggest polluters on the planet ????