• danc4498@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Could you imagine a world where we first used atomic power for good and not evil?

    • Emi@ani.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      13 hours ago

      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.

      • _stranger_@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        edit-2
        12 hours ago

        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.

      • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        13 hours ago

        if there was not as much scare of nuclear power.

        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.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 hours ago

          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.

        • MrQuallzin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          12 hours ago

          Chernobyl happened through the incompetence of leadership, not because they thought it was “completely safe”.

            • MrQuallzin@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              11 hours ago

              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.

    • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      12 hours ago

      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.

      • thisbenzingring@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        11 hours ago

        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.