23
Ageing nuclear plant in Florida at risk from climate crisis, advocates warn
(www.theguardian.com)
Florida Chernobyl sounds right about where we're at now.
this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2025
23 points (100.0% liked)
US News
165 readers
94 users here now
US-specific news, no politics
Rules:
- No politics. Nothing about governments, parties, or politicians. I love politics but this is not a politics community, there are plenty of those. !politics@sh.itjust.works is recommended.
- Reliable sources only.
- Articles are good. Self-posts or blog posts by professionals or journalists are fine. Memes or random blogs, no.
- Post title must match the headline. Edits for clarity are fine.
- Don't be a jerk.
- No racism, no bigotry, no spam.
- Be productive.
Other communities of interest:
- !world@quokk.au
- !politics@sh.itjust.works
- !news@lemmy.world
- !usnews@beehaw.org
- !askusa@discuss.online
Icon courtesy Dighital - Flaticon
founded 2 months ago
MODERATORS
It'd be more like Fukushima, right? Flooding damage rather than a design flaw explosion.
Putting a nuclear power plant in Florida is by far the dumbest thing I'll read all day.
But nuclear is “safe”! And “clean”!
/s
It actually is though. Even counting Chernobyl it has fewer deaths per kwh than wind energy.
Then I guess Florida has nothing to worry about. I’ve never heard of wind energy killing anyone. Did someone fall off a turbine while servicing it or something?
Yeah that's the most common case. It's big construction, so there'll always be some hazard there.
Solar is a little lower than nuclear, presumably because you don't need to work with heights.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/494425/death-rate-worldwide-by-energy-source/
Well, when America was great, hurricanes like the Great Galveston Hurricane were able to launch surprise attacks. We're getting rid of NOAA to make that happen again. What's better than a nuke plant getting hit by a hurricane? A nuke plant getting hit without preparing to get hit!