In general, we often hear from people who espouse ignorance who nonetheless like to make statements claiming authority from "science." Hell, there is a whole group of people who run around shouting about "creation science" and for that matter, a religion called "Christian Science" that has no connection with science.
I would not qualify a person who obviously understands neither finance or engineering to assert a "truth," particularly when one has not a shred of knowledge about what a Brayton cycle is, or the long practiced history of Brayton cycles.
My son is working on a Ph.D. in nuclear engineering and I assure you he would not have been admitted to it if he didn't know what a Brayton cycle is.
Now we have an antinuke talking about "truth" who clearly doesn't have the slightest clue what a Brayton cycle is and yet comes here to make silly assertions about both science and the purpose of nuclear engineering.
I have have often written on the subject of process intensification in this space in the Science forum. Brayton cycles are a key component of process intensification procedures. I can write about these things because I know what science is and, consequently, whether a person with whom I'm speaking knows what it is.
I see lots of folks who are clueless about science here, some honest about it, but wish to know more - which is fine, even great - and some who make assertions about science despite their obvious cluelessness. Most of the latter are antinukes.
I have a very clear vision here, and only remark on it to point up that antinukes know nothing at all about nuclear energy other than they hate it, just as antivaxxers know nothing about immunology other than that they hate the technology.
Seven British nuclear reactors have operated on Brayton cycles, one of them, still operating and still saving lives from the fear and ignorance of antinukes who give neither a fuck about climate change or air pollution, has been in operation since 1983.
Antinukes are nearly always the equivalent of antivaxxers or creationists discussing, say, molecular biology, except antivaxxers can never aspire to the number of people killed by antinuke ignorance.
The death toll from antinukism is roughly 19,000 people per day according to a publication widely accessed by scientists concerned with human health, and the health of the planet, something, again, about which antinukes couldn't care less.
It is here:
Global burden of 87 risk factors in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019 (
Lancet Volume 396, Issue 10258, 17–23 October 2020, Pages 1223-1249). This study is a huge undertaking and the list of authors from around the world is rather long. These studies are always open sourced; and I invite people who want to carry on about Fukushima to open it and search the word "radiation." It appears once. Radon, a side product brought to the surface by fracking while we all wait for the grand so called "renewable energy" nirvana that did not come, is not here and won't come, appears however:
Household radon, from the decay of
natural uranium, which has been cycling through the environment ever since oxygen appeared in the Earth's atmosphere.
Here is what it says about air pollution deaths in the 2019 Global Burden of Disease Survey, if one is too busy to open it oneself because one is too busy carrying on about Fukushima:
The top five risks for attributable deaths for females were high SBP (5·25 million [95% UI 4·49–6·00] deaths, or 20·3% [17·5–22·9] of all female deaths in 2019), dietary risks (3·48 million [2·78–4·37] deaths, or 13·5% [10·8–16·7] of all female deaths in 2019), high FPG (3·09 million [2·40–3·98] deaths, or 11·9% [9·4–15·3] of all female deaths in 2019), air pollution (2·92 million [2·53–3·33] deaths or 11·3% [10·0–12·6] of all female deaths in 2019), and high BMI (2·54 million [1·68–3·56] deaths or 9·8% [6·5–13·7] of all female deaths in 2019). For males, the top five risks differed slightly. In 2019, the leading Level 2 risk factor for attributable deaths globally in males was tobacco (smoked, second-hand, and chewing), which accounted for 6·56 million (95% UI 6·02–7·10) deaths (21·4% [20·5–22·3] of all male deaths in 2019), followed by high SBP, which accounted for 5·60 million (4·90–6·29) deaths (18·2% [16·2–20·1] of all male deaths in 2019). The third largest Level 2 risk factor for attributable deaths among males in 2019 was dietary risks (4·47 million [3·65–5·45] deaths, or 14·6% [12·0–17·6] of all male deaths in 2019) followed by air pollution (ambient particulate matter and ambient ozone pollution, accounting for 3·75 million [3·31–4·24] deaths (12·2% [11·0–13·4] of all male deaths in 2019), and then high FPG (3·14 million [2·70–4·34] deaths, or 11·1% [8·9–14·1] of all male deaths in 2019).
Climate scientists have also weighed in on the fear and ignorance spread by ignorant antinukes:
Prevented Mortality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Historical and Projected Nuclear Power (Pushker A. Kharecha* and James E. Hansen Environ. Sci. Technol., 2013, 47 (9), pp 4889–4895)
As for bourgeois brats whining stupidly about nickels and dimes, I note that there are none who give a shit about future generations. All of the wind and solar crap they've been using to greenwash a fossil fuel dependent world will be landfill in 25 years or less, a liability to those generations. The Vogtle nuclear reactors will be operating as the 22nd century dawns, saving lives and producing clean energy for generations otherwise left with the ruins of this generation's extreme and contemptible ignorance.
Have a swell week.
= new reply since forum marked as read
