4 ms·

And, as far as deaths go, you can't get numbers for something you didn't count. No real accounting has ever been made of the number of people who got cancer and

And, as far as deaths go, you can't get numbers for something you didn't count. No real accounting has ever been made of the number of people who got cancer and/or died from nuclear activities, starting with the activities at the Hanford Site on through atmospheric testing and today's nightmares like Fukushima. The nuclear industry regularly uses this technique of "nothing to see here" to hide the fact that all nuclear plants leak and discharge radiation. All produce waste with an un-fixable lifecycle. As far as your Wikipedia link, it was uploaded by an individual person. No references there. Helen Caldicott is widely respected and far more of an authority on the subject that you or I or the journalist at the Guardian whom you cite.

arcticbull 7y ago
Yeah that's not really true. Incredibly extensive accounting was done for instance on the total number of premature deaths from Chernobyl, and the UN sets the number right around 4000 from all causes -- including people who committed suicide because they thought they were 'contaminated'. The current radiation levels in Pripyat are around the same as being on an airplane [2, 3] and much, much, much lower than getting a CT scan. FWIW, they continued to operate reactors on the site until 2000. This stuff is incredibly well studied. [4] The total number of premature deaths from burning fossil fuel is 7.3 million every single year. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_accidents https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_accidents [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deaths_due_to_the_Chernobyl_disaster https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deaths_due_to_the_Chernobyl_di... [3] https://www.livescience.com/65450-weird-chernobyl-facts.html https://www.livescience.com/65450-weird-chernobyl-facts.html [4] https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/bio-effects-radiation.html https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/b...
acidburnNSA 7y ago
> No real accounting has ever been made of the number of people who got cancer and/or died from nuclear activities, First of all, nuclear weaponry waste from WW2 and the Cold War are wholly unrelated to activities of civilian nuclear power. While the material is similar in nature, you do not need to melt commercial waste down into radioactive vats of acid to extract pure weapons-grade plutonium in order to make low-carbon commercial nuclear energy. The civilian waste is solid ceramic and sits on parking lots at nuclear sites, where multiple decades of waste can fit nicely on a small area. Again, that's the glory of high energy density. For Chernobyl and Fukushima, people absolutely count the effects. For example, UNSCEAR's entire mission is to do just that [1]. So far the counts are in, ~60 direct deaths from Chernobyl plus up to 4000 early cancer deaths on top of a few million that would have occurred naturally (small increase). Up to 1 death from Fukushima. As it turns out, more people die from coal plants operating normally every day than have died from nuclear accidents ever. > As far as your Wikipedia link, it was uploaded by an individual person. No references there. That'd be Figure 2 from the CBO in [2]. Helen Caldicott is the laughing stock of many respectable scientists. Don't make me dig up some of the ridiculous stuff she's said. She's a true clown. [1] https://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2008/09-86753_Report_2008_GA_Report_corr2.pdf https://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2008/09-86753_Report_20... [2] https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/115th-congress-2017-2018/reports/52521-energytestimony.pdf https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/115th-congress-2017-2018/re...
- MertsA 7y ago
  > Helen Caldicott is the laughing stock of many respectable scientists. Don't make me dig up some of the ridiculous stuff she's said. She's a true clown. Oh please do, she truly is a quack. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qaptvhky8IQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qaptvhky8IQ
- swish_bob 7y ago
  This persuaded me to look her up. Wow ... https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/apr/05/anti-nuclear-lobby-misled-world https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/apr/05/anti-n...

arcticbull 7y ago

Yeah that's not really true. Incredibly extensive accounting was done for instance on the total number of premature deaths from Chernobyl, and the UN sets the number right around 4000 from all causes -- including people who committed suicide because they thought they were 'contaminated'. The current radiation levels in Pripyat are around the same as being on an airplane [2, 3] and much, much, much lower than getting a CT scan. FWIW, they continued to operate reactors on the site until 2000. This stuff is incredibly well studied. [4] The total number of premature deaths from burning fossil fuel is 7.3 million every single year. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_accidents https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_accidents [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deaths_due_to_the_Chernobyl_disaster https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deaths_due_to_the_Chernobyl_di... [3] https://www.livescience.com/65450-weird-chernobyl-facts.html https://www.livescience.com/65450-weird-chernobyl-facts.html [4] https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/bio-effects-radiation.html https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/b...

acidburnNSA 7y ago

> No real accounting has ever been made of the number of people who got cancer and/or died from nuclear activities, First of all, nuclear weaponry waste from WW2 and the Cold War are wholly unrelated to activities of civilian nuclear power. While the material is similar in nature, you do not need to melt commercial waste down into radioactive vats of acid to extract pure weapons-grade plutonium in order to make low-carbon commercial nuclear energy. The civilian waste is solid ceramic and sits on parking lots at nuclear sites, where multiple decades of waste can fit nicely on a small area. Again, that's the glory of high energy density. For Chernobyl and Fukushima, people absolutely count the effects. For example, UNSCEAR's entire mission is to do just that [1]. So far the counts are in, ~60 direct deaths from Chernobyl plus up to 4000 early cancer deaths on top of a few million that would have occurred naturally (small increase). Up to 1 death from Fukushima. As it turns out, more people die from coal plants operating normally every day than have died from nuclear accidents ever. > As far as your Wikipedia link, it was uploaded by an individual person. No references there. That'd be Figure 2 from the CBO in [2]. Helen Caldicott is the laughing stock of many respectable scientists. Don't make me dig up some of the ridiculous stuff she's said. She's a true clown. [1] https://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2008/09-86753_Report_2008_GA_Report_corr2.pdf https://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2008/09-86753_Report_20... [2] https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/115th-congress-2017-2018/reports/52521-energytestimony.pdf https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/115th-congress-2017-2018/re...

MertsA 7y ago
> Helen Caldicott is the laughing stock of many respectable scientists. Don't make me dig up some of the ridiculous stuff she's said. She's a true clown. Oh please do, she truly is a quack. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qaptvhky8IQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qaptvhky8IQ
swish_bob 7y ago
This persuaded me to look her up. Wow ... https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/apr/05/anti-nuclear-lobby-misled-world https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/apr/05/anti-n...