Are windfarms more dangerous than nuclear power?

[Cort Haus]

I read somewhere that the number of deaths worldwide from windmills is 52. Deaths at Chernobyl were supposedly around 50, plus two people in an accident in Japan. So the wind industry has matched nuclear's total accident record in 20 years while producing nearly 1% as much power & at only 10 times the cost.

[snoopy369]

Yes. Particularly Dutch windmills. They're vicious suckers. They hide in corners. You're walking down the street, or skating on the levee, or whatnot, and all of a sudden, BAM!, a windmill hits you right in the kisser.

Serious: Yes, of course. Nuclear power is far safer than any other power in terms of (people killed)/MW. Look at Coal ... People are just scared of the word "Nuclear". Maybe because they don't know how to pronounce or spell it? Or because physicists are scary? Dunno.

[notyoueither]

I read somewhere that the number of deaths worldwide from windmills is 52.

What?

How?

[Theben]

Probably they use smart, sofisticated peeples to set up and use nuke plants while they use the Al Bundys (the construction ones) of the world to set up and operate wind turbines.

[SpencerH]

Deaths at Chernobyl were supposedly around 50

An interesting piece of political spin.

[Dinner]

I read somewhere that the number of deaths worldwide from windmills is 52. Deaths at Chernobyl were supposedly around 50, plus two people in an accident in Japan. So the wind industry has matched nuclear's total accident record in 20 years while producing nearly 1% as much power & at only 10 times the cost.

See... Now you're using math and logic both of which are things which your average anti-nuclear energy fear mongers are totally unable to comprehend.

[Tattila the Hun]

An interesting piece of political spin.

Direct deaths were 56 or so, cleanup crews mostly, and about 4000 extra cancer deaths. Which doesn't seem like a lot.

I'd love to see some non-biased info on modern, western nuclear plants and uranium mining...

[Dinner]

Wiki says cancer cases but didn't say how many people died. That's also an estimate not a hard figure.

[FrostyBoy]

Wind Turbines also kill birds and cause disruptions in their flight paths.

No matter what we do, we will **** up the planet.

[Dry]

I read somewhere that the number of deaths worldwide from windmills is 52. Deaths at Chernobyl were supposedly around 50, plus two people in an accident in Japan. So the wind industry has matched nuclear's total accident record in 20 years while producing nearly 1% as much power & at only 10 times the cost.

Depends what those numbers mean.
How did those 52 die?
Was it directly from the way electricity is generated by windmills, or are they also indirect death. Like falling off one of these mills, or during the building of the mills.
If it is the latter, then you have to count also the indirect death for nukular energy. How many workers died in the whole world, that is including in former USSR, China, Iran, Korea and others, during the building of nuclear plants.

Now, that being said, I still think the number of death per KWH produced will be smaller for nuclear power. And even if it is not, then we should count other indirect death. Those due to power shortage in the case there was no nuke power. How many life saved because of energy/electricity? That is something windmills cannot provide today.
If we put in perspective how many life nuclear power costs vs how many life it saves, there is no hesitation.
Don't look at the costs only, also look at the benefits. Windmills are a joke.

[DanS]

Mining uranium is a particularly nasty operation through pollution. Gotta include costs from that as well.

[Unimatrix11]

Yes. Particularly Dutch windmills. They're vicious suckers. They hide in corners. You're walking down the street, or skating on the levee, or whatnot, and all of a sudden, BAM!, a windmill hits you right in the kisser.

Serious: Yes, of course. Nuclear power is far safer than any other power in terms of (people killed)/MW. Look at Coal ... People are just scared of the word "Nuclear". Maybe because they don't know how to pronounce or spell it? Or because physicists are scary? Dunno.

It´s nocular, Snoopy. Nocular.

[Unimatrix11]

Despite being from the ´eco-camp´, i dont have as many objections to NP as most of my people do, but the major problem i see is the waste-problem. Isnt a lot of the waste suitable for weapons? And is it really a good solution to dig that stuff under, and hope nobody digs it back up within the next 20K years? In germany they want to use a salt-mine for it. I am not a geologist, but a salt-mine? Doesnt salt help corrosion? Doesnt salt tend to rise to the surface (in geological time-frames) - or at least is pretty mobile in the underground? And have all the radiating waste in one place? Seriously, taking responsibility would not be anything like dig it where i cant see it and be gone, but something like building observable building on ground, or just below it and have them guarded and checkep-up properly.

I just want to remind people, though, that uranium is also a limited ressource, which might not even last as long as oil. Wind-energy does not need any fuel. From a sustainablity point of view, wind-power is for both reasons, the waste-problem and the fuel-problem, way superior (in such magintude, like a nuclear sub is superior to a conventional one - to give a pro-NP-metaphor).

(I dont buy the death numbers anyway - 83% of people know, that statistics, esp. in this field, can not be trusted).

[Arrian]

Mining is messy. Disposing of nuclear waste is a problem. And, of course, if something goes wrong at a nuclear reactor, the consquences can be catastrophic. Even though the odds of such an event may be tiny, that's not a trivial concern.

So no, I don't buy that windfarms are more dangerous than nuclear plants.

-Arrian

[Lorizael]

Scientists need to get together and come up with an entirely new name for fusion power plants in order to fool the public into believing it's not nuclear like fission plants are. That way we can get some funding into fusion power and stop having to worry about all this silly energy stuff. I vote for calling it doughnut power.