I don’t know history of uranium very much but wasn’t it first used to paint ceramics and later radium for glowing watches? Uranium bombs were made later probably after it was used to generate power. But I wonder what our world would look like if there was not as much scare of nuclear power. Perhaps bit like fallouts world? We still have some time left to 23rd October 2077 thankfully.
The first man made reactor (there’s an extinct naturally occurring one) was created in 1942 as part of the Manhattan project to create the first bombs. So we really did speed run the tech tree for bomb on that one. The first nuclear power plant was in 1951.
I was pro nuclear until solar became cheaper than nuclear but I think if there was less scare about nuclear, there would have been more Chernobyls. That happened because of thinking it’s completely safe.
I’d sure hope that the latest generation of a technology would be considered safe. That’s generally how things work. And then when accidents occur, we learn and make things safer the next time.
As to them considering it completely safe, I’d love to read about that if you have sources. Cause I doubt that they thought it couldn’t fail.
Oh yes, you’d consider it safe, but you’d probably also be aware of its faults and shortcomings.
Now I think I read it years ago in a book about the incident, but even reading the Wikipedia page I think we are both right: some of those working there were not even trained specifically for nuclear reactors, cause part of the technologies were considered state secrets.
I was pro-nuclear until Georgia Power stuck me with the bill for Plant Vogtle 3 and 4.
(Or rather, I was pro-nuclear until shortly after construction began on a 7-year plan that ultimately took 15 years, when it started to become clear that gross incompetence and corruption was going to make it an expensive debacle.)
Nuclear power from Vogtle 3 and 4 costs 16¢ per kWh (according to the linked document), by the way, compared to less than 0.1¢ per kWh expected by OP’s comic.
people down voting you haven’t considered the cost of dealing with the waste. Consider how long and expensive Hanford Washington cleanup is and how much damage it’s done to the environment around it. Then there’s Fukushima Japan. The damage will be dealt with for a 1000 years. And the reactors that don’t break still have so many spent rods and other waste that can’t just be thrown away. The best idea was to store it in the bottom of old mines but nobody wants it shipped over their backyard to get it there. It’s a dead end.
Could you imagine a world where we first used atomic power for good and not evil?
I don’t know history of uranium very much but wasn’t it first used to paint ceramics and later radium for glowing watches? Uranium bombs were made later probably after it was used to generate power. But I wonder what our world would look like if there was not as much scare of nuclear power. Perhaps bit like fallouts world? We still have some time left to 23rd October 2077 thankfully.
The first man made reactor (there’s an extinct naturally occurring one) was created in 1942 as part of the Manhattan project to create the first bombs. So we really did speed run the tech tree for bomb on that one. The first nuclear power plant was in 1951.
First use: glowing paint
Second use: cancer
deleted by creator
I was pro nuclear until solar became cheaper than nuclear but I think if there was less scare about nuclear, there would have been more Chernobyls. That happened because of thinking it’s completely safe.
Chernobyl happened through the incompetence of leadership, not because they thought it was “completely safe”.
It’s a good thing leadership incompetence is something that only ever happens once
And only in USSR!
Incompetence AND overconfidence, cause those reactors were the latest generation and considered completely safe.
I’d sure hope that the latest generation of a technology would be considered safe. That’s generally how things work. And then when accidents occur, we learn and make things safer the next time.
As to them considering it completely safe, I’d love to read about that if you have sources. Cause I doubt that they thought it couldn’t fail.
Oh yes, you’d consider it safe, but you’d probably also be aware of its faults and shortcomings. Now I think I read it years ago in a book about the incident, but even reading the Wikipedia page I think we are both right: some of those working there were not even trained specifically for nuclear reactors, cause part of the technologies were considered state secrets.
I was pro-nuclear until Georgia Power stuck me with the bill for Plant Vogtle 3 and 4.
(Or rather, I was pro-nuclear until shortly after construction began on a 7-year plan that ultimately took 15 years, when it started to become clear that gross incompetence and corruption was going to make it an expensive debacle.)
Nuclear power from Vogtle 3 and 4 costs 16¢ per kWh (according to the linked document), by the way, compared to less than 0.1¢ per kWh expected by OP’s comic.
The watches were radium, not uranium.
That world, that wonderful utopic world… we could weaponize it!
Not really. It’s not economical and never has been. Civilian use of nuclear energy has only ever been a cover for nuclear arms development.
people down voting you haven’t considered the cost of dealing with the waste. Consider how long and expensive Hanford Washington cleanup is and how much damage it’s done to the environment around it. Then there’s Fukushima Japan. The damage will be dealt with for a 1000 years. And the reactors that don’t break still have so many spent rods and other waste that can’t just be thrown away. The best idea was to store it in the bottom of old mines but nobody wants it shipped over their backyard to get it there. It’s a dead end.