inFact: Nuclear Energy @inFactwithBrianDunning
inFact: Nuclear Energy  @inFactwithBrianDunning
Uploaded March 2010 | Updated September 2026, 1 hour ago
Some say nuclear energy is ready to make a comback; some say it's still too dangerous. How do you know which to believe? infactvideo.com

Nuclear reactors have gone through 70 years of development. After the prototype Generation 1 reactors, like Chernobyl, the world went to Generation 2, which included a lot of safety improvements. Generation 3 reactors being built now have fundamental improvements: Designs where the reaction can't be sustained if anything goes wrong. Generation 4, now being planned, will be safer and cleaner than anyone could have dreamed 20 years ago.

But some people see only the problems of the past, rather than the promise of the future. Opposition to nukes is one reason we're not all driving around today in electric cars.

At Three Mile Island in 1979, a valve broke, and some coolant leaked into a container designed for that purpose. No one was injured. Within the industry, Three Mile Island was regarded as a shining example of how well the safety systems work. Unfortunately, The China Syndrome, a movie about a nuclear accident, had come out only 12 days before; and the public's perception was that nuclear energy was too dangerous.

In all of history, there's been exactly one civilian nuclear accident in which anyone was hurt: Chernobyl, in 1986. It was the oldest reactor operating, decades obsolete. One faction wanted to try a dangerous test; another faction disabled some safety systems to prevent it; and then the shift ended and everyone went home. The new shift weren't told anything was happening until it was too late. Read about it, it's staggering, you don't know whether to laugh or cry.

Within a few months, 56 people had died from radiation, and it's projected that as many as 4,000 may eventually die. But in the United States alone, 50-60,000 people die every year from lung cancer caused by air pollution from coal and oil burning power plants. We would need a Chernobyl meltdown every three weeks just to match the ongoing US death toll we've chosen by clinging to our current fossil fuel system.

But isn't nuclear waste just as bad? Yes, it's bad, but lobbying against future plants won't make the existing waste go away. Generation 3 and 4 reactors produce almost no high level waste, and what they do create is recyclable. We've already created most of the nuclear waste the world will ever see.

Look to the future. Look to the facts and the science, and make an informed choice.
inFact: Nuclear EnergyDebunking the Rothschild MythsCNN: Behind the ScenesSkeptoid #300: The Secret of the Gypsy QueenPeople would panic if they knew the truth about alien visitationSinging Tesla CoilGhost Caught on VideoinFact: Locally Grown ProduceDeath Valley DakarinFact: Logical Fallacies 2Stirling EngineBuilding 7 Did NOT Look Like a Controlled Demolition
inFact with Brian Dunning |

inFact: Nuclear Energy

SHARE TO X SHARE TO REDDIT SHARE TO FACEBOOK WALLPAPER