Devil wrote:Oiless
Just in case your maths is not up to it, 3 MILLION humans die each year because we pollute the air with coal, oil and fossil natural gas, yes, 3,000,000, the whole population of a largish city. And this does not take into account the suffering of many who do not die or the cost to keep them alive. If we stopped using fossil fuels today, we could cut our healthcare bills in half, within a few years. I don't suppose you are as old as I am but, if you are, think back to your first three decades of life. I bet you thought that asthma was a very rare disease suffered only by those with an allergic disorder and you had never even heard of emphysema, it was so rare. Even lung cancer was rarer then than today, yet everybody, or nearly so, smoked.
Ah yes, there's that condescending attitude that I enjoy so much, rearing it's head again. I disagree with you, so perhaps I am incapable of calculating that 6% of 50 million is 3 million. Nice.
Nowhere have I said that burning coal, or any other fossil fuel, is a healthy thing.
I believe that we are going to be burning more coal as time goes on. I think it's a bad idea, but it's going to happen irregardless of what I think.
I also believe that we are going to use more nuclear power, and I believe that there is a campaign underway to understate the potential problems with nuclear energy.
The UN is cited as an unbiased body; given that some of the most influential member countries are heavily involved in producing nuclear energy, and in selling components (and entire plants for that matter) to other countries, I find myself unable to trust their impartiality.
The WHO is cited as a trustworthy unbiased source. Nevertheless I look at the sources of their funding and I find myself unable to trust their impartiality about anything.
So, I am aware that there will be more nuclear plants in the future, in fact Canada will sell some of them, and they will have the same pressure tube problems that they always had, or perhaps they'll solve those problems, in which case new unforseen problems will crop up.
There will be various accidents, increasing in frequency as the number of plants in service rises.
Careful selection of research will disguise or minimise any ill effects caused by the industry, and dissenting research will be marginalized.
However, just because that's the way things are doesn't mean that I have to stop questioning and thinking.
The very first thought that enters my head when I begin to read something is: "Follow the money; who stands to gain.".
Oh, about asthma, I grew up in an area quite remote from "civilization", there was a little girl, a bit younger than I, that would have terrible asthma attacks when she went anywhere near a town. She was perfectly fine the rest of the time. I had no doubt what caused asthma: air pollution. That was over 30 years ago, so apparently, assuming that what you wrote applies to you Devil, I was ahead of you there too.
Just because I don't like air pollution doesn't mean I have to turn a blind eye to the potential downside of nuclear power. Nor does it mean that I will feel all warm and fuzzy and suspend my disbelief when sources that I regard as potentially suspect tell me that it's not as bad as all that.