Why people protest against nuclear energy when reactor meltdown happens...

Isn't porky against nuclear energy because it would ruin his profits from petroleum and natural gas?

Yes. user is just a retard and unironically buys the technocrat meme.

I don't know man it's almost like the worst train crashes in history killed just about a few dozens of people but a nuclear disaster has the potential to render large swaths of land and population centers of millions of people inhospitable for thousands of years.

They do you fucking morons. BNSF has been regularly protested against by environmentalists because they do oil and coal trains. It's why BNSF, like all American railways, also operate their own private police force to remove protesters. Amtrak's Empire Builder and Coast Starlight services are usually delayed when this happens because porky has to shut everything down across 1-2 thousand miles of track if there's a choke at one point.

Attached: 4.jpg (620x395 14.05 KB, 69.9K)

a lot of people would argue that it's the same thing since trains carry nuclear waste for the military, hazmat goods transport is one of the reasons why rail construction is strongly opposed by nearly all communities

Attached: dodx train.png (600x418, 473.18K)

Not French porky though. Areva would love to sell nuclear technology to Iran but can't because of the USA.

France is their own master, they don't have to listen to America. And given the French response to America during the invasion of Iraq, they usually don't anyway.

You dont need to make large reactors. Its fine though, chinks and poos + the private sector are investing in them and will bend us over instead of the World having total energy independance. The way Western finance has handled investment in energy almost makes me a commie tbh

The argument that if it was doable it would have been done is so stupid. I'm sure its a logical fallacy. You would think communists of all people would understand that due to the constant criticism of their desired economic systems.

Furthermore assuming "porkies" sole motive of capital accumulation is an unconscious drive that always min-maxs outcomes (capital, social or otherwise) is foolhardy. They are still human beings with flaws, biases and cognative dysfunction.

If "porky" mass produced reactors that produced energy independance World wide they would be working against their interests. Energy sources like coal or renewables allows them to centralize their control over scarce resources and commodity chains. Not to mention the sort of power that comes from controlling energy. They can and often do cut off parts of the World when it suits them. It wouldnt be so easy if said parts of the World were energy independant.

Different Porkies defend different segmental interests on the market. Soot Porky supports coal mining, Petrol Porky support oil extraction, Atom Porky supports nuclear fission, Green Porky supports solar paneling — and they often have to compete for domination. Note however that sometimes these Porkies aren't even discrete entities — many of the Porkies involved in nuclear energy also are involved in green energy. Électricité de France for instance is 65% nuclear, 15% coal, 12% renewable and 8% gas.

Because radiation is spooky. Can't see it, smell it, feel it, etc. This scares people more than it should.

Radiation from coal fired plants kills at a higher rate per annum than the results of poorly designed and operated 2nd and 3rd gen nuclear plants.

Its not as simple as capital gains. You can have all the pretend gains you want but that doesn't translate so well to actionable capital with a basis in material value. Hence why there are very few lolberg porkies but loads of neolib ones.

I'm not sure how that relates to what I said. Could you please clarify?

Yeah but people don't know about that. Plus, raising mortality in the abstract via cancer and declining life expectancy for misc. reasons is a lot less visceral than the idea of acute radiation poisoning.

Coal porky doesnt invest in energy independant sources because it doesnt generate material value that is productive for him in order to generate capital and more importantly control over global society. That isnt to say that there arent commodity and resource chains involved in said energy independance models. The salient factor here is control of energy, if porky wished he could tank most economies very easily or even cause massive famines due to the control of energy, not so easy if they can make all thy need. If pure capital accumulation was the goal of porky he'd be a lolberg. Instead he is a neolib as he trades capital for control which in then in turn allows for massive stable gains.

So the claim that if 4th gen LFTR models arent workable because they havent been invested in by backers who have a vested interest in working against it is nonsense.

Acute radiation poisoning is in the absolute minority of cases in deaths caused by fallout pound for pound coal causes more cancer than nuclear. At least nuclear has the benefits of generating usable isotopes to combat it. Espcially 4th gen as it produces more isotopes that produce alpha/beta radiation that allows for a more targeted approach than traditional chemo. There are many other factors in coal fired plants like putting lead and mercury in the water et al. People are so gullible. I dont see how any of you could place any credence in the idea of class consciousnous when it is so easy to get them to work against their own interests.

Why people doesn't just accept Death?

I don't think that's a fair characterization. In fact, when people notice that a company plans to prop down a coal fired plant, a nuclear plant, or really any big industrial building near them, they will come out and protest it. It's just that as soon as you move into a more large scale approach to protesting, larger forces start to feed into it that block out a clear view: government secrecy, corporate ownership of the media, lack of mobilizing organizations. And specifically for nuclear power, entrenched cultural trends.

When I'm talking about people protesting nuclear power, keep in mind that this is largely just the remnant of a protest movement of 40 years ago, during the cold war, when it was part of a larger framework; the peace movement, anti missile movement, the at the time still fairly novel modern environmentalist movement, the whole Chernobyl panic, and so on. This was reflected in the the media people consumed at the time, and as such became part of the cultural consciousness. People being spooked about nuclear power doesn't so much represent a general trend of them not being aware of their own interests, but a specific cultural heritage. Which is why people in say India or China, who did not inherit the mentioned cultural movements, don't quite have the same spooking against nuclear going on.

Things should improve as soon as the 🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧boomers🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧 die out some more.