Something from a non-human perspective about the deaths-per-terawatt-hour rates of various power sources in the early 21st century [source #1, #2, update of #1], and the irrationality of pushing for more coal over renewables (cough cough current Australian government), or literally anything over nuclear - even without fusion - please?
...especially when you take into account that living within 50 miles of a coal-fired plant exposes you to over three times as much ionising radiation per year as living within the same distance of a nuclear plant? [source] -- RecklessPrudence
From Humanity: A History by Grolrax F'tizzle...
Humans are very fond of their own inventions. Proof of this is their adoration of the invention of fire, before recorded history. This is despite evidence that starting fires voluntarily has been discovered independently in several different areas at several different times. In the early periods of human development, humans did not go far from setting things on fire to derive light and energy for their environmental tailoring.
Even into the dawn of their technology age, during the time when their species was taking its baby steps into space travel, most of the population was deriving energy from burning things. Their chief and most popular combustive agent at this time was petrified remnants of dead peat swamps, commonly called 'coal'. The other was the compressed and heated remains of pre-historic animal fats, commonly called 'oil'. Terrans burning both of these agents took some time to recognise that the combustion byproducts were toxic, and even longer to reduce the toxic emissions.
Primitive humans are very averse to loss of perceived profit. When confronted with a sensible choice or money, primitive humans would much prefer money.
Prompts remaining: 14 Submit a Prompt! Ask a question! Buy my stories!
