Alone Together: The Decline of Social Interaction & Is the Future in Nuclear?

Today on Something You Should Know, the interesting origins of food names you've wondered about but never knew. Then, we have a problem.
Humans are social creatures, but we're not being very social. Basically, since the 1990s, we have seen a steady decline of people spending time being social.
We're actually looking at a roughly like 40% reduction. People aren't going to places like parties or inviting friends over for dinner or, you know, hosting events where they host family or visit other family or friends.
Also, why people only recently started saying um, ah, and you know, and the renewed interest and push for nuclear power. There is quite a growing group of pro-nuclear activists, Most of them are environmentalists, very much concerned about climate change.
They recognize that beefing up renewables like wind and solar will always fall short. All this today on Something You Should Know.
This episode is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. Do you ever find yourself playing the budgeting game? Shifting a little money here, a little there, and hoping it all works out? Well, with the Name Your Price tool from Progressive, you can be a better budgeter and potentially lower your insurance bill too.
You tell Progressive what you want to pay for car insurance, and they'll help you find options within your budget. Try it today at Progressive.com.
Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and Affiliates. Price and coverage match limited by state law.
Not available in all states. Something you should know.
Fascinating intel. The world's top experts.
And practical advice you can use in your life. Today, Something You Should Know with Mike Carruthers.
Every food has a name, but where some of those names come from will surprise you. Hi, and welcome to Something You Should Know.
Food names are fascinating. For example, Philadelphia cream cheese.
You would assume it must have started in Philadelphia, but it did not. Philadelphia cream cheese started in New York.
It was called Philadelphia because that city was associated with high-quality food products. Gatorade.
Gatorade does not contain any alligator. It was a kidney specialist from the University of Florida who helped develop Gatorade, and the school's football team is the Florida Gators.
So it was called Gatorade. What about spam? Not the email kind of spam, but the canned meat kind of spam.
It got its name from a contest. And there is no official explanation for its meaning, but most spam enthusiasts assume spam is short for spiced ham.
Why is it called a frisbee? Well, it comes from the Frisbee Pie Company of Bridgeport, Connecticut. They get the credit for this.
The empty tins that the pies came in were perfect for launching across a field. The first plastic version was called the Pluto platter flying saucer.
Whammo bought the rights to that and stamped Frisbee on it instead. And marshmallows? Marshmallows started out as medicine.
In the 1800s, juice from the roots of the marshmallow plant were extracted and cooked with egg whites and sugar. It was whipped up and given to children to soothe sore throats.
And that's why we have marshmallows. And that is something you should know.
I'm sure you've heard the statement, the phrase, that human beings are social creatures. We need social interaction.
It's critical for our well-being and survival. People need people.
The problem is we're becoming less social, and many of us don't even realize this. This is a real problem, according to my guest, Jeffrey Hall.
He is a professor in the Department of Communication Studies and the director of the Relationships and Technology Lab at the University of Kansas. He's co-author of the book, The Social Biome, How Everyday Communication Connects and Shapes Us.
Hi, Jeffrey. Welcome to Something You Should Know.
Hey, it's a pleasure to be here. So explain what you mean when you say that we have become less social.

You know, when did this start? Why did it start? And what are the consequences of it? So basically, since the 1990s, we have seen a steady decline in the United States and across a lot of Western countries of people spending time being social. we're actually looking at a roughly like 40% reduction of time spent being social, just conversing for the sake of conversation, for the sake of being social around one another.
One of the areas that it's declined the most is actually one that's kind of hard to see because people aren't about doing it. People aren't going to places like parties or inviting friends over for dinner or hosting events where they host family or visit other family or friends.
So what's interesting is we're not, the people that you see out and about who are actually on their phones are one example of people not necessarily spending time talking to each other. But there's a bigger issue here, which is that people are not prioritizing time with one another across Western Europe and in the United States and have not been doing so for 25 years.
But that took a major hit during the pandemic. A lot of folks actually went down dramatically in their face-to-face conduct and a good number of people haven't recovered since really it's that that was the that was the tipping point right there was covet it's sort of think about the idea that it accelerated an existing trend right we were already on our way to a less social world and it pushed things further and one of the reasons reasons that it really pushed things further was for younger adults.
And during that time of development, you know, people want to spend a lot of time in the company of their friends. They fall in love.
You know, they spend a ton of time outside of their family of origin, building their new families. And during COVID, a lot of that time was restricted.
So for a lot of folks, they don't have the kind of friends and connections they would like to have simply because they didn't make them to begin with. So COVID created the conditions that accelerated an existing trend and made things slightly worse.
But if that's your way of being and you know no different, you don't even know there's a problem. So how do you even begin to want to fix it if you don't know that this isn't like this isn't normal?

That's a really great question. You know, one of the hardest things is actually to direct, you know, the messages that the Surgeon General has and other people have about trying to focus on sociality to raise awareness about the problems associated with loneliness to people who need it the most.
So, you know, one of the things that my co-author, Andy, and I talk about a lot is that as professors of communication, you know, as people who actually have very rich social lives, and we're both parents, and we're both married, you know, we actually, even in our situation, we still, through all the research that we get, have to be reminded to be social. There's a whole subset of groups of people out there who aren't even aware that not being social is a problem.
They're not really aware that these are things that they need to be doing for their well-being. So one of the sort of goals that we have broadly is to try to make it clear to folks that taking small steps, achievable little moments of interaction with strangers, with customer service representatives, with the people that you see can make a difference in your daily sociality and actually over time sort of build up your social battery to be more social.

So how do you do that? How do you, you know, I see this, especially with younger people, when you're in a store or you're watching them interact with a stranger, like somebody that works at the store, they're not very pleasant. They're not unpleasant.
It's just very, you know, bottle of water, please. There's no play.
There's no social interaction. It's just the transaction.
And I see that a lot, that the people just don't engage. And one of the sort of symptoms of our age of interiority that we live in right now is the feeling of kind of frictionless technology.
So frictionless technologies are those things which basically make it so that we don't have to have any contact with another person in order to get our food. So that's like DoorDash to order products, to make exchanges, to buy things.
That's all the Amazon products to be delivered to your door and otherwise. And the idea is that we've built up a technological environment where so much of the social behaviors, which were part of just being part of everyday life, shopping, being a neighbor, existing in a community, are things that we have used technology to replace.
So there's a good argument to be made that we have collectively as a society agreed that we would prefer to exchange all of those small moments of connection and interaction with things that are simple or perhaps frictionless in the terminology of the tech industry. But the consequence of that are, as you say, people become less familiar with how to do it.
They also become less comfortable with doing it when they're expected to. So those moments of sort of like bottle of water, please, as you meant before, also are for people who are uncomfortable or unfamiliar with the very process of day-to-day interactions and transactions.
Every opportunity to have an interaction with another person, just acknowledging the dignity of that person and that role that they're playing plays an enormous difference in our sense of well-being and connection to the community. So that means looking me in the face and say thank you.
That means actually acknowledging the presence that, you know, of a shared moment, whether it's the weather or if you lived in Los Angeles like I did, bad traffic. Whatever it is that you share together is a thing that you can exchange with a person near you.
And these small moments of connection build up the possibility of a greater sense of well-being in general. But how do you convince people of that? Like, again, if they don't notice, if they don't see it, if they think what they're doing is fine, what are the benefits that you can point to and say, well, maybe if we did it this way, it would be better.
How would it be better? Yeah. Well, I'll give you five that are all research-backed, empirically supported.
Number one, right? The number one predictor of longevity is social connectedness, right? This is actually the equivalent. Being lonely is equivalent of smoking 20 pack of cigarettes a day or 20 cigarettes a day, right? We also, number two, what's interesting is it doesn't just mitigate harm.
So being social and having strong relationships doesn't always make you live longer. It makes you happier while you're alive.
The Harvard Men's study found that if you make a change in your sociality in the middle of your life, so maybe you weren't a very social person when you were younger, but you make a commitment to being more strongly connected to your community, your friends, and your family at your middle age, you will be happier later. So you can change at any time.
So that's the second one. The third is your days are better.
If you look at these what's called time use studies, which basically is how do people allocate their time? Where does it go on any given day?

A more social day is generally a better day. It's a day that people feel more connected to one another.
They feel happier. They feel a greater sense of purpose and meaning.
Number four, meaningfulness is actually very difficult to derive from a lot of the sort of pursuits that also might make people feel satisfied in the moment but not happy in the long term. Media is a great example of that.
Lots of media is very pleasing in the short term, but not very satisfying in the long term. Relationships, on the other hand, are fundamentally built in a way where the constant sort of work that we have to put into maintaining our friendships and being close to other people are rewarding every time we do it.
That it's not something that has diminishing rewards the more that we have a strong friendship that lasts for years, but we gain in value because we keep working at it. And the last thing I would just say is that it's not as hard as I think that a lot of people might fear.
Not trying to be perfect in our communication. There is no perfect way to communicate.
That a lot of the ways to actually be better at communication is to merely be a responsive partner to the person right next to you. Meaning pay attention and listen and participate.
You got it. Is the goal then to convince people to do this or to convince people to help people to do this? Because, again, if they don't see it as a problem, then how are they going to say, well, this doesn't apply to me.
I don't know what he's talking about. Yeah, that's a great question.
One of the ways that we really want to approach this is that those who probably are the most socially adept and comfortable being social also are the ones that have the most to offer. So they're the people who are probably the most able to hear this message and act it in their daily lives.
But I would really sort of point out here is that it's very, very difficult for people who are, you know, very lonely, partly because loneliness co-occurs with depression, to easily sort of take action to sort of improve their circumstances. And you're not wrong, right? The difficulty of actually reaching out to the folks who are feeling disconnected in their lives in a chronic sense is very challenging.
But I think that one of the messages is that not only can you make, you know, sort of do certain things, take small steps that we offer very clearly that you can take in order to improve your days. But the second thing I think is really critical is doing so for other people is an important act for the people that you care for.
So when I spend time, let's say, you know, planning to spend time with my friends, when I make a plan, I'm in fact going out with my high school friends tonight to hang out. And we do so every other month or every third month.
You know, it took arrangement. People didn't have times that line on.
We have a text thread where you're always like, well, who's in town and what can we do? But the fact that we work at that means that I get a benefit from it. But if I don't put the work into sort of developing those friendships, I can't have those friends.
I can't enjoy those friendships. And in return, all of my friends also benefit by being responsive to that text thread, to making the small sacrifices to

show up or to put aside other plans to be there.

So the idea is that we give to other people by being social and prioritizing being social

in our lives.

We're discussing the human need to be social and how many of us are not meeting that need.

My guest is Jeffrey Hall, author of the book, The Social Biome, How Everyday Communication Connects and Shapes Us. We talk quite a bit about health on this podcast, and I can tell you I try to take care of myself.
I mean, I work at it. And for a while now, I've been taking this supplement called MitoPure.
And I can tell you I feel stronger. When I exercise, I recover faster.
What MitoPure is, is a precise dose of something called Urolithin A. I've read a lot about it.
It's a natural compound that's produced by gut bacteria. And MitoPure is this precise dose that encourages cellular renewal.
MitoPure is the only urolithin A supplement on the market

clinically proven to target the effects of age-related cellular decline.

And that's the thing.

See, it works on the cellular level.

And with regular use, you'll see and feel the difference.

In the form of improved energy levels, more endurance,

and when you exercise, you'll recover faster.

As you get older, you probably know that you lose muscle strength.

So this is important. MitoPure is shown to deliver double-digit increases in muscle strength and endurance without a change in exercise.
So awaken the strength, power, and resilience already in you with the first and only supplement clinically proven to rejuvenate health at the cellular level. I encourage you to read more about it on their website.
Timeline is offering 10% off your order of MitoPure. Go to timeline.com slash something.
That's T-I-M-E-L-I-N-E dot com slash something. I am a food lover.
I love to cook. I've collected probably a hundred cookbooks over the years.
Good food is important to me. But some days I can't cook, or I just don't want to cook.
But I still want to eat well, which is why I love and want to tell you about Factor Meals. Factor Meals are freshly prepared meals delivered to your door.
And to be clear, these are not frozen meals. This is not a kit of ingredients that you have to make.
These meals are complete restaurant-quality meals. You simply heat them up for two minutes.
Eating well has never been this easy. They have 45 weekly menu options.
You can pick gourmet meals that fit your goals. Choose from CalorieSmart, Protein Plus, Keto, Vegetarian, and more.
Meals like ginger teriyaki salmon, cheesy chicken and broccoli casserole, garlic rosemary pork chops. What we do at our house is we serve the food on nice plates, maybe with a glass of wine,

and I swear you would think you're eating at a fine restaurant. The food is really that good.
Factor also offers satisfying breakfasts, lunches, and guilt-free snacks and desserts. So look, here's an offer that makes this easy to give it a try.
Get started at factormeals.com slash something50off and use code SOMETHING50off to get 50% off plus free shipping on your first box. That's code something50off at factormeals.com slash something50off for 50% off plus free shipping.
And I'll put that promo code in the show notes. So Jeffrey, I think people have heard the statistics that loneliness is on the rise, people have fewer friends, but it doesn't seem to be something that people, I mean, I don't hear a lot of talk about addressing the problem.
Yeah, well, I think we collectively as a society certainly need to be continually reminded about the importance of this. I think that there have been other kind of harbingers of this when Robert Putman wrote his outstanding book, Bowling Alone.
He's been warning us about this for years. People are aware that these problems are happening.
But at this particular day and age, the trends that were put in place in the 90s have all gotten generally worse. So this is a time that I feel like there's a certain amount of energy and excitement around this.
I think the surgeon down the United States played a role in that. You know, I think different countries throughout the world have acknowledged the importance of seeing loneliness as a public health concern.
But I think more broadly, people are receptive to the message. You know, I think we've seen a change recently where people are starting to say, wait a second, you know what, I want to improve the quality of my social life.
How do I go about doing that? And so, you know, maybe just like in the, you know, in the seventies and eighties where people started taking like physical fitness more seriously as a thing that they need to do to be healthy. Maybe we're seeing a time now where people can say, you know what? I want to be socially fit.
Do you think it's just a big part of this in a very fundamental way is electronics, media, phones, whatever you want to call it, has just replaced it. That instead of going to hang out with your friends, you can sit on the couch and hang out with your virtual friends.
And so you've just swapped one for the other. It's a great question.
One of the ways to think about this is think about the fact that all technologies are energy efficient. So whether it's a dishwasher or whether it's, you know, even the printing press, it is an efficient, much more efficient way of basically getting things done in the past.
People love efficiencies. And one of the theories and ideas we operate from is the value of people place on having to do less.
So a text is less work than a phone call. A phone call is less work than a face-to-face interaction.
So people actually generally, when given the option, will kind of trend towards the things that require less of them. So I think that you're not wrong to suggest that the proliferation of technologies for communication between individuals have made it easier to sort of forego more challenging communication that is more face-to-face or that's a longer conversation like on a phone call.
I think what's really tricky is that these technologies are also ones which are always being updated and more and more appealing. So it's hard to resist them.
So the technology sort of reflects back to us our values that we're placing and become easier and more efficient as they are developed to make it simpler and simpler to do less work with our social relationships. When you're out talking to people and presenting this idea, what's the reaction? What do you hear? I mean, do people go, I don't know what you're talking about? Or do they say, well, yeah, this is great.
I've been waiting for this. Or I mean,

what do you hear? Well, I think one of the very sort of positive notes that I've heard when people have responded to this idea is that they're excited about being given some direction,

you know, being given some direction on sort of what to do or how to approach it is valuable.

I think a lot of people also find it fascinating to think about this idea that they have a social battery and social energy that they want to build up or develop like a muscle that you do when you exercise. I think that people are also receptive to the idea that it doesn't take that much.
It's not that hard. And you know, it's not that complicated that we have particular little strategies like talking to strangers or showing dignity to another person or listening rather than trying to be a perfect communicator that are all like not impossible.

But they show research backed evidence to to get people moving in the right direction.

But the compliment we get the most often is that it's really sympathetic to this is hard.

Like it's not easy to really change our habits or to do do differently when it comes to something as common and every day as, uh, you know, communication. I'm asking people to take small steps and have self-forgiveness towards the fact that these, this is difficult, but it's work that's absolutely worth doing.
And the, the first step is just to commit to doing it, I guess. You've gotta, you've gotta realize that this is something worthwhile, a goal to pursue.
Exactly. I think people have to acknowledge that this is something that they want to sort of improve in their lives, and that they want to try to find a seek that balance that creates a very healthy social biome for them to live in.
Have you looked at, like, whether or not people, like, I remember people in my life that were great at this, they're kind of an inspiration to like wow look look how he navigates all these people and interacts and makes people happy when he talks to them that like wow i i'd like to do that is is there any sense of that you know finding a role model for this is really helpful yeah i mean i think we can always look in our communities for like who's really good at this and maybe they can give me some tips you know i certainly have people who i've met before that are amazing storytellers or such excellent listeners or are just so funny that i want to spend more time around or around them um and we're always going to find people that are superlative at communication are really good at. And I think getting some ideas about how to be good at it from them is a great idea.
But Andy and I actually try to offer something that's much simpler, is that a lot of times people just kind of like to be heard and they enjoy the fact that another person is responsive to them. So what's fascinating is when there are different sort of interventions that are done in communication research or in psychology research to have people engage in specific social behaviors.
A lot of times the value of just being present or just listening or just acknowledging another person is as good as any perfect line or any perfect statement or any great joke. It's simply valuable simply to be there for another person to be responsive and interested in what they have to say.
You know, I think that, you know, the kind of great Dale Carnegie's argument that if you want to be interesting, talk to the person's interests is a great piece of advice. In many ways, merely being responsive to what's exciting to another person makes them interested in you.
You mentioned a moment ago a book called Bowling Alone. When was that out?

It was released, I believe, in 99. I don't remember that, but I love that title because, and what does he say in that? Putnam does this analysis that goes back into roughly the 1950s to the present at that time, so the late 90s, and talks about sort of the decline of membership in bowling leagues, in social clubs, in Elks Lodge, all these different sort of organizations that were pro-social, community-oriented, and oftentimes just meant for leisure and spending time together for fun.
And he looks at the decline of membership, decline of participation in these things for roughly a 50-year period 50 year period. So his arguments around bowling alone, in the book bowling alone, were really fundamental and sort of setting the tone for all lot of researchers thinking about the importance of social behavior and having a just and healthy society.
Well, what did he what did he conclude? Because a lot of that decline happened before social media and the Internet. So and not only those organizations, but, you know, just involvement in church and those kind of things all seem to go down the same decline.
Yeah, well, at the time, you know, his conclusions were really focused on a couple of factors. You know, one of those factors was actually the change of women in the workplace.
So tons of women joined the workplace during that same period of time, which made it harder for

there to be a person in the home that was coordinating the social schedule or planning

events or making time for these things to facilitate the, you know, the organization

of the family to make these things possible. Some of it actually at the time he was, you know,

concerned about the internet system, you know, internet society or the rise of the internet as being a contributing factor and the ease in which that media was able to be accessed. But the point that Putnam made, I actually would love to be able to share is he was interviewed about his work in The New York Times only last year.
And last year, he said that, you know, for years, he's kind of been a Cassandra warning us about the processes of these things, and he only sees them continuing. And the recommendation that he has now is the same that he one he had in the 90s, which was we have to convince people that it's in their own interest to be more socially obligated to one another.
For us to live in a world in which that we are obliged to one another to care for one another. And that's a better world to live in.
Well, earlier, I stated an assumption that if people don't know it's a problem, it's hard to fix. But do people know this is a problem? Do people lament that, gee, I wish I had more friends, I wish I was more social? Or do people, I mean, I'm sure there's people in every camp, but generally speaking, the people who are struggling with this, do they know they're struggling with this i i think so um one thing that i think is a very interesting statistic people are generally speaking have friends um it's there's a high high high percentage of people who have friends it's like 98 97 people say i have friends the second is people's rates of satisfaction with their friends are very high so people are are like, yeah, I really like my friends.
I have good friends. And they're even higher if you ask questions like, do you have people who will celebrate your good times and cheer you on if something good's happening? And they say even a higher percentage of people say, yes, I have those people.
But the two things that people also say is I'm not as close to my friends that I would like to be, and I'm not making time for them. So one thing to think about, I think, is the broader sort of message is for sure there are folks out there who are struggling with chronic loneliness, and I think we need to be attentive to that.
But I think for the kind of the modern kind of American circumstance is that people have relationships, they just don't have the time and aren't making it a priority to deepen those relationships or prioritize them in the way that we organize our days and weeks.

You know, I bet everybody listening has a sense that this is going on, that they've noticed this lack of social connection. And it's good to hear from someone who actually studies it and can quantify it to get a sense of just how big the problem is and what we can do to fix it.
Jeffrey A. Hall has been my guest.

He is a professor in the Department of Communication Studies

and the Director of the Relationships and Technology Lab at the University of Kansas. And he has a book out called The Social Biome, How Everyday Communication Connects and Shapes Us.
And there's a link to his book at Amazon in the show notes. Jeffrey, thanks.

I appreciate it. Thank you, Mike.

There are many ways to entice a potential new customer with flashy branding and calculated

marketing strategies. But at the end of the day, the success of a business comes down to the ability

to close the sale. And for businesses like Thrive Cosmetics, Allbirds, or Skims, it's what goes on

behind the scenes, making selling and for for shoppers, buying, simple, that makes the difference. For them, and for millions of businesses, that difference is made with Shopify.
Businesses that want to grow, grow with Shopify. Because if your goal is growth, your commerce platform better be ready to sell wherever your customers are scrolling or strolling.
And Shopify will make sure you're ready.

On the web, in your store, in their feed, and everywhere in between.

Nobody does selling better than Shopify.

And with ShopPay, they boost conversions up to 50%.

Meaning way less carts going abandoned and way more sales going...

It's no wonder Shopify is home of the number one checkout on the planet.

Upgrade your business and get the same checkout Allbirds uses. Sign up for your $1 per month trial period at shopify.com slash realm, all lowercase.
Go to shopify.com slash realm to upgrade your selling today. That's shopify.com slash Realm.
had two years ago when I dated that mistake for five months. Don't leave money on the table.
Switch to H&R Block and get a free Second Look review. Second Look is included at no additional cost with the purchase of tax preparation.
Results vary. All tax situations are different.
Fees apply if you have us file an amended return. One thing you don't hear talked about a lot is nuclear power.
And I confess, I don't know a whole lot about it, but my sense has always been that nuclear technology can produce more, better, and cleaner power than any other source except for the safety concern. What if something goes wrong? You mention nuclear power and people think of Three Mile Island or Chernobyl or the fact that nuclear power and nuclear bombs have the same origin.
And for all of those reasons and probably a whole lot more, there aren't a lot of nuclear power plants. But as you're about to hear, the people concerned about the safety of nuclear power plants aren't so concerned about it anymore.
We have pretty much licked that problem. And in fact, there are 93 nuclear reactors in the United States.
And in France, 70% of their power comes from nuclear reactors. So why aren't we building more of them? What is the future of nuclear power? Here with some insight into this topic is Marco Vischer.
He's an award-winning journalist who has written extensively about climate policy and clean technology, and he is the author of several books, including The Power of Nuclear. Hi, Marco.
Welcome to Something You Should Know. Thank you for having me.
So why isn't anyone talking about nuclear power? It doesn't come up much. I don't hear it talked about much.
In all the conversations about energy and alternative forms of energy like wind and solar, no one ever mentions nuclear. This is the fun thing about nuclear power, I think.
It is a very nerdy thing, but it's not at all what is exciting to me. What is a much more inspiring answer is saying that nuclear power is zero carbon electricity that's produced 24-7.
People will say that nuclear power is our best bet if we want to avoid further climate change because no greenhouse gases are emitted so they can replace coal and natural gas plants. Now, others will say, no, nuclear power is the worst technology ever.
It's the most dangerous thing we have. It's leading to environmental collapse, they say, or an all-out war.
It's destroying civilization. And I guess for me, I prefer a more historic approach.
I think throughout human history, we always faced scarcity. So we were always deprived of enough energy to break away from from from the toil from hard labor and we cut down forests you know to keep warm um we depleted coal mines once we found out that burning coal is more efficient than burning wood and then suddenly came along nuclear power this this bizarre hocus pocus kind of power right and it's abundant and it's clean and i think it's just magical um just one gram of uranium produces as much energy as three tons of coal so the invention the discovery of nuclear power is nothing short of a revolution.
And sadly, for all sorts of reasons, we're 80 years later now, and we still haven't used its full potential. Well, I find it really surprising that you as a journalist who writes a lot about clean energy, that you are so pro-nuclear.
Because I don't't know why i would just think you would not be but but let's go back when did nuclear power become a thing in the second world war so the world was introduced to nuclear power with the atomic bomb dropped on hiroshima a couple days later one dropped on Nagasaki, ending the world war, basically. That's probably not the best way to tell people that we have found a fantastic energy source, right? It's probably the worst PR stunt ever, if you think of it.
But this is the reality. This is how we came to learn about nuclear power.
Nuclear bombs and nuclear plants have the same basic physics. They both split atoms and they use that energy.
What's relevant here is if you think of a nuclear weapon as an outsized stick of dynamite with the energy bursting out all at once, a nuclear plant is a mere stick of incense with the energy being calmly released. So the first nuclear power plant went online when? This was the 1950s so after the second world war when we knew how to how to get the energy from splitting the atom soon all these ideas came up to establish a fleet of electricity plants if you will power plants and and produce nuclear power for peaceful purposes, providing electricity for households and businesses.
This was done in the US, but also in Russia, later on in France as well, and Canada, and all sorts of countries. They may have had different reasons for building this fleet of nuclear power plants.

For some, it had everything to do with the nuclear bomb and this very secret nuclear technology. If you had a nuclear bomb, you were on top of the world, right? This was such a powerful weapon.
nothing had ever been seen before in warfare. And for others, it was, for other countries, nuclear power was perfect because they had depleted coal mines.
France, for instance, doesn't have that much resources at all. So for France, it made a lot of sense to have nuclear power plants providing energy.

And so when did it fall out of favor?

It seemed to have, and you know,

people that don't like nuclear energy point to Chernobyl and Three Mile Island

and talk about nuclear waste and all that.

At some point, because it seems like it came online and this was a great thing, and then something happened.

So you mentioned Three Mile Island.

We're talking about an accident at a nuclear plant near Harrisburg where a partial meltdown took place in 1979.

This is in the history books probably in the U.S. as the worst nuclear accident in the U.S.

And this was a serious accident, right? It was due to a stuck valve and a bad judgment call in the control room. Now, nobody was injured.
Nobody fell ill. Nobody died.
That's because the radiation released to nearby residents amounted to, say, the equivalent of having

a... Nobody died.
That's because the radiation released to nearby residents amounted to, say, the equivalent of having a few x-rays at your dentist. Now, Chernobyl was a completely different story.
It was a unique story, if you will, a reactor with a unique design that's not in use anymore. and the accident happened under unique circumstances.
This was not a meltdown, but a blow-up, if you will.

A reactor exploded with the reactor open and exposed. Now, to estimate the effects on public health, we should go by the reports from the Chernobyl Forum, which is a collection of several UN organizations, including the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation.
The World Health Organization is also part of it. So these reports show that immediate after the event, a few dozen deaths because of the explosion and acute radiation sickness among workers and firefighters and that's where the death toll still stands today a few dozen now by 2065 80 years after the accident there is a chance of an increase in deaths due to cancer so in a population of several million people,

we can expect a few thousand additional deaths, but we will never be able to tell whether these cancer cells actually came about because of exposure to the radiation released after the chernobyl. Radiation is something that messes

with our minds. And I think even before these accidents, it was already in people's mind that

there was something eerie about radiation. Even before nuclear power existed, we were afraid

of radiation. So when radioactivity was discovered around 1900 by Marie Curie in in France you had all these comic books for instance especially in the 1920s talking about these superheroes who who had brilliant powers because of radiation or there super villains super villains who could destroy the planet using radiation, right? When x-rays became more popular in hospitals, doctors, mainly doctors, developed diseases, terrible diseases, because they would test their x-ray machines by holding their hand in front of the of the machine there were horrible stories there

and because radiation probably because radiation is invisible and you cannot smell it it has become

a monster basically an invisible monster and we think that any exposure to radiation would make us

very very sick so i'm sensing from what you're saying that despite people's fears about nuclear power, that in fact, it is clean and it is safe. And if that is true, then why hasn't that truth that nuclear power is clean and safe, why hasn't that truth pushed nuclear power forward and pushed the critics aside it seems to me that the suspicion of nuclear power is so deep in our unconscious I guess even we are always looking for um for justifications to not use nuclear power so if explain, this happened to me so many times, if I talk to people who don't like nuclear power, I can comfort them and say, well, it's really not as dangerous as you think if you compare this with other ways of energy production, like coal mines collapse and the gas pipelines burst and a dam could break.
I can comfort people and say, it's really the safest energy source we have along with solar and wind. Then they move on and say, what about the waste? And I said, no, no, no, the waste is not a problem.
We know exactly what we do. Waste has never made anyone sick or nobody ever died from nuclear waste from a nuclear reactor.
It's perfectly fine. And then they say, oh, but there will not be enough uranium, right? No, no, there is enough uranium on every continent.
It's even in the ocean. It's everywhere everywhere and it seems people come up with arguments to not use nuclear power some people it seems don't want to be comforted and and i think that their suspicion of nuclear power is just having a prejudice looking for a justification well i remember hearing another argument like well what if what if one of our enemies you know blew up a nuclear power plant and all this radiation escaped and and that that wouldn't be good a nuclear reactor is actually built to um to withstand a bomb um probably not the heaviest bomb but the the reasons to use your heaviest bombs on a nuclear reactor are that would be crazy it's very unlikely that anything like that would ever happen um this is another thing mike this is another it's such an unlikely scenario if you come to think of it once you start thinking in those kind of unlikely scenarios you will never be comforted right but if you're right and i don't have any reason to think you're not but if you're right if nuclear power is really so great why aren't more people screaming from the mountaintops that we need more nuclear power plants, there is quite a large group, a growing group of pro-nuclear activists.
Most of them are environmentalists, very much concerned about climate change. They recognize that tackling climate change with beefing up renewables like wind and solar will always fall short just because wind and solar do not produce energy around the clock, whereas a nuclear plant is a true competitor to fossil fuels because a nuclear power plant produces electricity whenever you want it.
And these pro-nuclear groups are actually

gaining ground. We also see world leaders who make promises to expand the nuclear fleet.
There are business leaders from data centers and Twitter and Amazon who would like to see small modular reactors providing zero carbon electricity for their data centers etc so there is actually there has been a change over time favoring nuclear much more than has been the case in the past 20 years how much nuclear power is there now How many, if you know, how are there in the us and and or around the world and how much of our electricity comes from nuclear right now so around the world there are around 450 nuclear reactors spread amongst 30 countries or so but The US has the most nuclear reactors. France is the country with the highest percentage of nuclear power in the electricity grid, up to 70 or 75 percent, something like that.
Worldwide, these nuclear power plants provide around 10 percent of all electricity around the world. This is down from 17% at the height around the mid-90s or so.
So there is in share very much a decline, despite all the industry talk about a nuclear renaissance. That is not what I'm seeing, at least.
Since the year 2000,

about 120 reactors or so came online. That sounds impressive, right? But in the same years, that 20-year span, the same number went down, got taken off the grid.
So we're really not in a position that we can say that nuclear power is gaining ground. In Europe, nuclear power is the most important source of electricity.
So one in four light bulbs here provide light thanks to a nuclear reactor. What's the general mood of people? If you took the temperature of people, I mean, do they care? Are they pro-nuclear, anti-nuclear? Is it moving one way or the other? What is the temperature? Overall, people are much more willing to accept nuclear power than many people think, right? If you open a newspaper or look at the TV news, you would almost think that everybody is against nuclear power.
But this is not at all what is shown in opinion polls by established polling agencies. I remember in Poland, around 80% or so favors nuclear power.
This is because Poland has all these dirty coal power plants, and many people in Poland want to get rid of these coal power plants. But also in the Netherlands, the number of people who are in favor of nuclear power outnumber people who are against it by far.
And this is the case in many countries. And what's more interesting even is that this is the case in a very diverse group, even when you think of politics.
So Democrats also in a majority support nuclear power, even in the Green Party. I know in the Netherlands, more people actually support nuclear power than are against it it's different when you look at the people running the party but that's i guess politics and i guess it says something about politics which you know attracts people who may not have this technical expertise but are trained trained in communications and will have you, and the humanities, but not so much in natural science.
But this is surprising to many people, that there is wide public support for nuclear power, and it's rising, partly in Europe especially, because of the Russian invasion in in Ukraine because that's when it was shown so clearly that in Europe we have become very much dependent on fossil fuels coming from Russia and if you want to get rid of of that dependence then nuclear power is a very good bet because uranium is available all around the world and you don't need Russian uranium or so. You can get it from many places.
Is there any other anti-nuclear power argument besides the safety, besides the concerns about the waste, besides what we've already talked about and what people have heard. Is there any other argument? I guess the main thing now is people say we don't really need nuclear power because we have solar and wind.
Well, of course, we have solar and wind, but we need something to fill the time slots when the clouds are in the air blocking the sun, right? And when there is no wind. So for that, you could have batteries, but batteries don't grow on trees or so.
You need to produce them, right? Or you need to produce hydrogen if that's your option as a backup fuel. Currently, it's always natural gas that's used to backup solar and wind.
But that means carbon emissions, right? A nuclear power plant will replace a natural gas plant or a coal power plant. So that's one argument.
They say we don't need it. And the other argument, I guess, is nuclear reactor is indeed very very expensive and it takes a very long time before that reactor is finally ready and open to provide electricity to the grid well i freely admit that i know very little about nuclear technology and nuclear power, but and what a lot of what you said surprised me.
But as you were talking, and this is kind of breaking the rules of being a good interviewer where I'm supposed to focus exactly on what you're saying, but I was Googling a few things that you were saying to see if it were true. And everything you said is backed up, that there isn't a lot of evidence to support the critics of nuclear power, although there are critics and they do have their arguments.
I've been speaking with Marco Vischer. He's an award-winning journalist who's written extensively about climate policy and clean technology, and his latest book is called The Power of Nuclear.
And there's a link to that book at Amazon in the show notes. Marco, I appreciate you coming on and explaining all this.
Thanks, Mike. It was a pleasure being here with you.
I'm sure you're familiar with the fact that people say um, ah, and you know a lot. These things are called speech disfluencies, and we say them while we're putting our next thought together before we speak.
It's assumed that people have always done this throughout human history in all languages. But one researcher looked back through the literature for several centuries and could find no mention of people using um, ah, and you know.
The first discussion of these things appears in early 20th century writing and seems to coincide with the beginning of the phonograph and the radio. After the 1920s, when radio really started to be popular, discussions of um, ah, and you know became widespread.
And the assumption is that this is because with the invention of the phonograph and the radio, people could actually hear what they sounded like when they spoke and started noticing that people were saying um, ah, and you know. By the way, the very first recorded ah was made by Thomas Edison in 1888.
And that is something you should know. You know, we are always looking to attract new listeners, and you as a current listener, well, current listeners are the best source of new listeners because you tell somebody you like this podcast and suggest they listen, they're more likely to give it a try.
So please tell people about Something You Should Know. It really does help us.
I'm Mike Carruthers. Thanks for listening today to Something You Should Know.
Have you ever heard about the 19th century French actress with so many lovers that they formed a lover's union? Or what about the Aboriginal Australian bandit who faked going into labor just to escape the police, which she did escape from them. It was a great plan.
How about the French queen who murdered her rival with poison gloves? I'm Anne Foster, host of the feminist women's history comedy podcast, Vulgar History. Every week, I share the saga of a woman from history whose story you probably didn't already know, and you will never forget after you hear it.
Sometimes we re-examine well-known people like Cleopatra or Pocahontas, sharing the truth behind their legends. Sometimes we look at the scandalous women you'll never find in a history textbook.
Listen to Vulgar History wherever you get podcasts. And if you're curious, the people I was talking about before, the Australian woman was named Marianne Bug, and the French actress was named Rochelle.
No last name, just Rochelle. And the queen who poisoned her rival is Catherine de Medici.
I have episodes about all of them. Hello, I am Kristen Russo.
And I am Jenny Owen Youngs. We are the hosts of Buffering the Vampire Slayer once more with Spoilers, a rewatch podcast covering all 144 episodes of, you guessed it, Buffy the Vampire Slayer.
We are here to humbly invite you to join us for our fifth Buffy prom, which, if you can believe it, we are hosting at the actual Sunnydale High School. that's right on april 4th and 5th, we will be descending upon the campus of Torrance High School, which was the filming location for Buffy's Sunnydale High, to dance the night away, to 90s music in the iconic courtyard, to sip on punch right next to the Sunnydale High fountain, and to nerd out together in our prom best inside of the set of Buffy the Vampire Slayer.

All information and tickets can be found at bufferingcast.com slash prom. Come join us.