> Because nuclear power has been around for a long time already, and the industry remains extremely regulated.
The industry was very heavily regulated globally before Chernobyl and Fukushima, but look what happened.
I’m not saying I’m against nuclear power (as I’m not). I’m not saying that any industry regulation is generally ineffective most of the time, especially when financials and greed gets involved (even though it appears to be true). I’m just saying humans are bad at moderating risk over long periods of time.
> The industry was very heavily regulated globally before Chernobyl and Fukushima, but look what happened
Gross incompetence and huge design issues 40 years ago on one hand, and complacency+incompetence that required a huge natural disaster to pose a problem, and even then it resulted in less death and destruction than the evacuation, the natural disaster itself or your regular fossil fuel power plant? Not sure that's a good example.
> The industry was very heavily regulated globally before Chernobyl and Fukushima, but look what happened.
Apart from Chernobyl which was poorly designed and managed to begin with, other plants have proven safe. Even Fukushima hardly caused any death while several thousands people were killed by a once-in-a-lifetime tsunami. Let's put things in perspective, please.
The industry was very heavily regulated globally before Chernobyl and Fukushima, but look what happened.
I’m not saying I’m against nuclear power (as I’m not). I’m not saying that any industry regulation is generally ineffective most of the time, especially when financials and greed gets involved (even though it appears to be true). I’m just saying humans are bad at moderating risk over long periods of time.