I wonder why nuclear defenders are saying en masse, "Coal is worse!"

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

When there's a much better example of a credibly "worse than nuclear" thing for them to use -- the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

Thou shalt not diss a megacorp?

[NuclearDem]

1. To be fair...there's been more oil spills than nuclear meltdowns

Prince William Sound and Deepwater Horizon were far worse than Chernobyl

[Drale]

2. I'm not a nuclear lover but

how often is there problems with nuclear plants beside the fuel rods? Coal plants pump out dangerous poison pollution every single day. I can see the argument.

[JuniperLea]

3. If coal is worse, both need to go!

We have many other options.

[Cleita]

4. Amen!

:thumbsup:

[suffragette]

9. + 1,000

[IDemo]

5. I believe they are speaking in terms of electric power production

Almost none of our power is produced with oil.

[gateley]

6. Syphilis is worse than gonorrhea, doesn't make gonorrhea 'okay'. nt

[phantom power]

7. Couple reasons, I guess...

1) oil is not a direct replacement for nuclear electricity generation, but coal most definitely is.

2) Coal burning is the single biggest source of CO2, which is expected to do orders of magnitude more damage than the oil spill.

3) It is, indeed, worse than nuclear. So the statement "coal is worse" is true.

[Luminous Animal]

26. Indeed it is true but the inference is that we only have 2 choices.

[JVS]

8. Because nobody is stupid enough to suggest that increased dependence on oil is the future for energy

It's been part of the energy conversation for 40 years that there isn't enough oil and that some other source will be needed.

So we're left with the following choices.

A) Nuclear
B) Dig up coal, which is more plentiful than oil.
C) Renewables
D) Have a massive energy crisis.

And C seems to to be very much a theoretical choice, as its inability to generate the quantities necessary mean that its use to the exclusion of nuclear pushes us back into a choice between B and D

[Luminous Animal]

23. Portugal went from 17% to 45% renewable sources to generate electricity in 5 years.

"Today, Lisbon’s trendy bars, Porto’s factories and the Algarve’s glamorous resorts are powered substantially by clean energy. Nearly 45 percent of the electricity in Portugal’s grid will come from renewable sources this year, up from 17 percent just five years ago."

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/10/science/earth/10portugal.html

[Uncle Joe]

10. I believe there are several reasons.

1. They know all sources of alternative fuel must be exploited to wean us off oil, global warming climate change is the preeminent threat against humanity's existence, at least in any societal form that we're familiar with.

2. I believe the best options are solar, wind, geothermal and wave combined with a national smart grid.

3. The Obama Administration to some degree support those choices but also includes nuclear and "clean" coal in the mix.

By trashing coal the nuclear industry takes a subtle preemptive political shot against the current administration, Democrats in general and any rogue Republican that might become more skittish about nuclear while supporting "clean" coal.

Thanks for the thread, Commie Pinko Dirtbag.

[jmowreader]

11. Coal is far worse than anything, including nuclear.

In addition to the air pollution problem, you've got to deal with the 125 million tons of ash coal burning creates per year--and this ash contains every damn thing from arsenic to hexavalent chromium.

The thing about reactor waste is it can be reprocessed into new fuel. The French do this with a great deal of success--they separate out the neutron poisons from the used rods, make new rods out of the cleaned material and put them back in the reactor. OTOH, you cannot reprocess coal ash. You can't even safely use it as traction sand; when the Bunker Hill smelter was still operating in Idaho, the state highway department would get slag from Kellogg to sand roads with, and it worked pretty well.

Nuclear power is safe so long as nothing goes wrong. Coal is unsafe when everything goes perfectly right.

[Drale]

17. They use to use coal ash as an underbed for railroad tracks as well

but as far as I know they no longer do that.

[jmowreader]

21. Today they use pea gravel

I think they bedded tracks with coal ash when trains ran on coal, and they had to do SOMETHING with the ash.

[One_Life_To_Give]

12. 13,200 premature deaths in 2010

Compare the global death rates. A quick google search finds amongst

pollution from existing coal power plants is expected to cause some 13,200 premature deaths in 2010, as well as 9,700 additional hospitalizations and 20,000 heart attacks.

adverse health impacts amounts to more than $100 billion per year.

source: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Air_pollution_from_coal-fired_power_plants

And for the City of Dublin's ban on coal burning

was also associated with a nearly six percent reduction in non-trauma related death. Further, death from respiratory causes decreased by 15.5 percent and for cardiovascular causes the rate decreased by 10.3 percent.

By comparison the Gulf resulted in very few Human lives. And if Coal is that bad for us, what is it doing to all the animals around us?

[Kennah]

13. Shooting myself in the nuts is worse than shooting myself in the ass

[Hugabear]

14. Except with oil and coal disasters, they don't render entire areas uninhabitable for centuries

Oil and coal disasters are definitely bad, and nuclear disasters don't happen that often. But when nuke accidents do happen, they tend to really fuck up the surrounding area for a very, very, very long time.

[buddysmellgood]

18. Yep

[Occulus]

19. Heh. Yeah, actually, coal fires DO render large areas uninhabitable for decades or centuries.

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/12/underground-coal-fire-centralia-started-1962-burns.php

You may have already heard the story of Centralia, PA, a coal mining town that had some 1,000 inhabitants at its peak. Now, that population is down to 9. It's become a ghost town for one of the most bizarre reasons imaginable--a fire started in 1962 to burn trash in a dump inadvertently spread to a coal seam underground and has simply never stopped burning.

The most recent report, published Dec. 1st in the Bismarck Tribune, confirms that the fire continues to this day--it's lasted an incredible 47 years so far.

Centralia, PA, served as the inspiration for the film Silent Hill. The fire will likely burn until all the coal is gone. When that will be is anyone's guess.

[DirkGently]

15. Seems we've heard that "lesser of two evils" argument before, somewhere ...

[FBaggins]

16. I can think of only one reason to say "coal is worse!"

Because it is.

When there's a much better example of a credibly "worse than nuclear" thing for them to use -- the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

That's not an unreasonable point on it's face. But nuclear doesn't really compete directly with oil. Oil doesn't produce much electricity and nuclear doesn't propel any cars (until the Jetsons show up).

They see people shouting "See! Nuclear is dangerous stuff... it can kill people!" But with coal it isn't "can" kill people... it IS killing people (and the environment)... and it's just plain dirty smelly stuff.

But make no mistake. Oil IS worse. It's quite possible that the exploding/burning refineries will have a greater health impact than the reactors (though not the same economic cost). And there's no question that the Gulf spill is a greater environmental disaster than anything those nuclear plants have given us so far... probably several times over.

Why aren't people screaming that the Japanese shouldn't use oil? Because they can't see an alternative. With nuclear you could always switch to burning coal and gas (though Japan doesn't have as much flexibility there as most countries).

[Zax2me]

20. I'll stand by the administration

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/13/japan-nuclear-reactor_n_835057.html

[sibelian]

22. Oh, because things need opposing, I guess...

Ideas are to be opposed, you know. Otherwise.... something. I don't know.

[Statistical]

24. Coal is far far far worse than the Gulf spill.

What makes you think coal isn't run by megacorps anyways?

[meow mix]

25. because there standing here naked, and desperate for you to look at something else

pathetic deflection

[Zorra]

27. "Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it"

Adolf Hitler

This is the mantra of fascist corporations, fascist corporate spokespersons, and their right wing flying monkey talking heads.

Unfortunately their insane drivel is so persistently and convincingly presented that it sometimes even infects unwitting, intelligent progressives.

[SidDithers]

28. Well oil is much better than nuclear for powering my car...

for providing electricity, though, the real choices are between nuclear and coal.

FWIW, ~52% of my electricity comes from nuclear, 26% from hydro-electric, and only 2% from coal.

Sid