You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
-10 points

lol uh… you know about the location and history of that facility… right?

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

It’s a nuclear power plant that provided clean and safe energy for many decades.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-16 points
*

While that is true, it was also the site of the worst nuclear disaster on US soil.

Don’t get me wrong - I’m not scaremongering, and I support nuclear power. It’s just a bit darkly ironic, imo.

Edit: I gotta go down these Wikipedia rabbit holes you guys are pointing me towards, because I’m clearly somewhat misinformed here. Seriously, thanks for sharing!

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

It was partial meltdown and the failsafe worked. No one was injured or had their health negatively affected by the incident. The worst nuclear disaster still had less negative effects than even a single modern coal plant does.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

2016 was my best-performing Presidential bid ever. My grandmother wrote my name in.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*

Calling it “the worst nuclear disaster” is not just incorrect but stupid. Just off the top of my head, I can name a worse reactor accident and a worse non-reactor nuclear accident on US soil.

SL-1, a low-power reactor in Idaho, exploded because of poor design and human error. An operator retracted the manually operated control rod too far. The reactor went prompt critical, causing a steam explosion, destroying the reactor vessel and killing all three operators. To this day, SL-1 is the only fatal reactor accident on US soil.

Cecil Kelley, a worker at Los Alamos, was fatally irradiated when a plutonium reclaimer machine went critical. The machine contained an aqueous mixture of plutonium slag of a much higher concentration than it should have, causing an excursion when the stirring was turned on. He died two days later. His autopsy was performed by one Dr. Lushbaugh, who removed several organs for experiments without permission.

TMI had zero fatalities, minimal release of radiation, and no measurable effect on health. Area residents were exposed to less radiation than the yearly background dose.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Well no I don’t since I’m not american

permalink
report
parent
reply
-25 points
*

There is nothing clean or safe about three mile island. The place had a meltdown and created tons of nuclear waste. Next you’ll be trying to tell me Fukushima and Chernobyl were safe, clean, and cheap.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

Why don’t you get back on Lemmy after you’ve actually looked into TMI

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

TMI had zero fatalities, minimal release of radiation, and no measurable effect on health. Residents of the area were exposed to less radiation from the accident than the yearly background dose.

Some layers of safety failed, but the rest did their job. That’s why we call it an accident and not a disaster. The plant continued to operate for decades with no issues. The only reason it’s so prevalent in the public consciousness is because of faulty reporting and irresponsible, ignorant people (like you) parroting the first thing they hear from sensationalist media.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Not The Onion

!nottheonion@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome

We’re not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from…
  2. …credible sources, with…
  3. …their original headlines, that…
  4. …would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

Community stats

  • 6.8K

    Monthly active users

  • 590

    Posts

  • 11K

    Comments

Community moderators