> That report (Fairlie, Sumner 2006) Please reread my posts here, beginning with the very first. I was writing about another report, titled "Chernobyl: Conseq

> That report (Fairlie, Sumner 2006) Please reread my posts here, beginning with the very first. I was writing about another report, titled "Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment", by Yablokov & Nesterenko. It was not authored by Fairlie. If you clicked once to the Wikipedia references I provided since my first post you could see that. Here it is, once again: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl:_Consequences_of_the_Catastrophe_for_People_and_the_Environment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl:_Consequences_of_the... You may think that European Greens reports aren't credible, however this is IMHO a very weak counter-argument, simply the classical ad hominem fallacy at work. My argument here is that this "What are the safest sources of energy?" article contents is highly debatable because it builds upon debatable theories. If the Chernobyl disaster really caused abut 1 million deaths, as stated by pertinent scientists in the aforementioned report, then the article's conclusions should be very different. > Civilian nuclear energy rarely results in a nuclear weapons program Iranian and North-Korean nuke weapons programs benefited massively from their civilian reactors, and this is widely documented ( see for example https://isis-online.org/publications/dprk/dprkplutonium.pdf https://isis-online.org/publications/dprk/dprkplutonium.pdf ) Stating that the IAEA, which is an UN agency, has the power to prevent anything is just an opinion. Nearly all nations, small or huge, routinely neglect UN injonctions without any consequence. > A legislature requiring a million year containment is far from an evaluation of the waste's toxicity. This is an opinion. I, for one, cannot see any other reason for those legal dispositions. Actions aiming at keeping a repository sealed for 1 million years cost more than those necessary to keep it for "a few" centuries, this was a deliberate decision. The Japanese don't seem so happy with dispersed fuel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_disaster_cleanup https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_disaster_cleanup