3 ms·
And, well, the question is also about the scientific-evidence-based that are lacking medias that incidents have been misleading for a large part of the populati
by zettacircl 7y ago
And, well, the question is also about the scientific-evidence-based that are lacking medias that incidents have been misleading for a large part of the population.
Coal is killing hundreds of thousands of people per year, as so alcohol and smoking do. Even if - fact based - nuclear incidents produced only thousands of deaths (not yearly, but in total : nearly 0 for Fukushima / https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster_casualties https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disa... , questionable for Chernobyl, etc.); people are really scared for "media"-related reasons.
- neilkakkar 7y agoExactly, something to bring to light. This is what I link to in the post: https://ourworldindata.org/what-is-the-safest-form-of-energy https://ourworldindata.org/what-is-the-safest-form-of-energy
- zettacircl 7y agoDefinitely, it would be much clearer in the article ! :) A shame that renewable energy production's deaths are not counted .. It's hard because it depends where it had been produced. But this would have been super nice to find such statistics !
- neilkakkar 7y agoAh, I see! So, if you look at the line above the line you quoted, I quote this same link in the article :) Is it not visible? ( I hope I didn't mess up deployment again :P )
- zettacircl 7y agoYou're right. My miss. I focused more on the quote that on what's before.