logoalt Hacker News

georgefrownytoday at 1:34 PM2 repliesview on HN

Solar and nuclear are comparable: 0.02 vs 0.03 deaths/TWh (https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/death-rates-from-energy-p...)

Depending on what kind of solar, it can have quite a high death/TWh ratio because people fall off roofs while installing them. As a ratio is far better now that so much new solar is ground level solar farms and not installed by amateurs or professionals who have a van, a ladder and watched a YouTube video that one time. Some older estimates based, I think, on generic roofing accident rates, were up to 0.44 deaths/TWh.

Wind is more dangerous than nuclear (0.04), I guess also from falls and accidents during construction and maintenance.

Edit: All are incredibly safe compared to the next worst, hydro (1.3, or 30 times worse than wind).


Replies

pfdietztoday at 1:49 PM

The differences in deaths from (non-accident) nuclear and wind/solar are very small compared to the amount of energy produced. The effect of the statistical value of lives lost is tiny compared to direct differences in energy cost, and so shouldn't have any effect on which is chosen.

This is not the case for coal, where the cost of lives can be substantial.

show 1 reply
tcfhgjtoday at 2:06 PM

what about other risks such as the risk of large scale contamination of habitable areas?