5 ms·

Nit pick - the best science at the moment suggests that radiation from Chernobyl killed just two hundred people, and Fukushima zero. Your point is a good one bu

Nit pick - the best science at the moment suggests that radiation from Chernobyl killed just two hundred people, and Fukushima zero. Your point is a good one but the specific example turns out to be untrue.

mrtksn 6y ago
I don't want to get into a death toll deal discussion but people killed by KGB and Stasi is just as low. A politician here a journalist there, people looking at death toll statistics must be wondering what was the big deal about Stasi, Chernobyl, KGB, Fukushima and so on.
- martinko 6y ago
  > I don't want to get into a death toll deal discussion but people killed by KGB and Stasi is just as low. You cant be serious.
  - mrtksn 6y ago
    Please correct me If you believe otherwise. But no indirect deaths please, the nuclear folks don't count these too. No inconveniences, life altering, career ending troubles, those don't appear on the only "few died due to nuclear accidents" statistics too. To be clear, I am not anti-nuclear however I don't buy the "Chernobyl and Fukushima are note big deal" message that the low death toll numbers convey.
    - morgante 6y ago
      The death toll from the KGB and associated state violence is likely in the millions, not a few dozen people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_repression_in_the_Soviet_Union https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_repression_in_the_So...
      - pmachinery 6y ago
        That link doesn't mention the KGB, the deaths and executions it refers to (largely of Communist Party and Red Army personnel) occurred before the KGB even existed, and nothing like what is described happened during the KGB era (1954-1991).
        varjag 6y ago
        KGB is the direct successor to MGB, which was spun off from punitive branch of NKVD, which itself was a reorganized CheKa. Huge swathes of KGB operatives worked through all of its organizational incarnations. They did (and Russian FSB still does) refer themselves as 'chekists' informally. Their professional holiday is the CheKa foundation day.
        pmachinery 6y ago
        Huge swathes of post-war German police, judiciary, political personnel were Nazi Party members[0], but we don't attribute crimes carried out in the Third Reich to West (or East) Germany or its institutions. If you want to pretend the KGB, or the regime it operated under[1], was just the same as the NKVD under Stalin, then please provide examples of the same crimes (mass killings) occurring from 1954-1991. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braunbuch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braunbuch [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De-Stalinization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De-Stalinization
        varjag 6y ago
        Do you really suggest that West German police was basically Gestapo that changed the name? Because that's what MGB to KGB transition was. The status was changed from Ministry to Committee, that's it. The policy has been changed under Khrustchev, but thousands of the same butchers that committed massacres of 1930s were serving (often in the same offices) until late 1970s.
        pmachinery 6y ago
    - brabel 6y ago
      > I don't buy the "Chernobyl and Fukushima are note big deal" message that the low death toll numbers convey. Why not? What evidence is there to the contrary? These death tolls vary by a lot, but even the high end is quite low compared to fossil fuels. The fear people have of radiation seems to be much greater than reality would justify. This causes very serious problems, like evacuating hundreds of thousands of people unnecessarily after an accident, destroying their lives due to mostly paranoia[1], as well as slowing down considerably our efforts to lower CO2 emissions (like Germany shutting down all its nuclear facilities even if that causes thousands of deaths due to increased pollution[2]). [1] https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Japan-nuclear-shutdown-more-harm-than-good-study-f https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Japan-nuclear-sh... [2] https://grist.org/energy/the-cost-of-germany-going-off-nuclear-power-thousands-of-lives/ https://grist.org/energy/the-cost-of-germany-going-off-nucle...
      - mrtksn 6y ago
        Because direct death at the accident is not what makes it big deal but the numbers are used to argue just that.
        orwin 6y ago
        what is a big deal then? Unusable area? Mining coal or rare earth for solar panel already do that for you on a two order of magnitude difference at least (not counting detroyed montaintops and water pollution). Population displacement? Yeah, again an order of magnitude inferior to dammage caused by mining (this time counting water pollution). Not counting when hydro power fail: two order of magnitude differential just counting china barrage failure. Would you dissmiss hydro power because of the barrage incident then? Because last time i checked, the death toll, the displacment toll and the lost land caused by hydro power were a lot more than nuclear for sensibly the same power production. Is it waste that grind your gear? Yeah, speak to the people who live near cadmium mines where nothing can grow anymore. Also a Co2 surplus in high atmosphere last around 100 000 years (order of magnitude here). Compare that to the dangerous radioactive waste. Also, coal mining and burning cause the area around to be more radioactive than the area around fukushima, or French uranium mines. Weird, no? You know why you really don't like nuclear power? Its because with solar panel, oil and coal, the externalities are paid by poor populations in China, India, Africa or south America. So its better for you (or me). Its because hydro power failure only happened in poor countries. Or rather, country you don't really know or care about. Italia, Brazil, China barrage failure each have death toll superior to fukushima + chernobyl counting displacement caused deaths (avoidable deaths).

mrtksn 6y ago

I don't want to get into a death toll deal discussion but people killed by KGB and Stasi is just as low. A politician here a journalist there, people looking at death toll statistics must be wondering what was the big deal about Stasi, Chernobyl, KGB, Fukushima and so on.

martinko 6y ago
> I don't want to get into a death toll deal discussion but people killed by KGB and Stasi is just as low. You cant be serious.
- mrtksn 6y ago
  Please correct me If you believe otherwise. But no indirect deaths please, the nuclear folks don't count these too. No inconveniences, life altering, career ending troubles, those don't appear on the only "few died due to nuclear accidents" statistics too. To be clear, I am not anti-nuclear however I don't buy the "Chernobyl and Fukushima are note big deal" message that the low death toll numbers convey.
  - morgante 6y ago
    The death toll from the KGB and associated state violence is likely in the millions, not a few dozen people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_repression_in_the_Soviet_Union https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_repression_in_the_So...
    - pmachinery 6y ago
      That link doesn't mention the KGB, the deaths and executions it refers to (largely of Communist Party and Red Army personnel) occurred before the KGB even existed, and nothing like what is described happened during the KGB era (1954-1991).
      - varjag 6y ago
        KGB is the direct successor to MGB, which was spun off from punitive branch of NKVD, which itself was a reorganized CheKa. Huge swathes of KGB operatives worked through all of its organizational incarnations. They did (and Russian FSB still does) refer themselves as 'chekists' informally. Their professional holiday is the CheKa foundation day.
        pmachinery 6y ago
        Huge swathes of post-war German police, judiciary, political personnel were Nazi Party members[0], but we don't attribute crimes carried out in the Third Reich to West (or East) Germany or its institutions. If you want to pretend the KGB, or the regime it operated under[1], was just the same as the NKVD under Stalin, then please provide examples of the same crimes (mass killings) occurring from 1954-1991. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braunbuch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braunbuch [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De-Stalinization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De-Stalinization
        varjag 6y ago
        Do you really suggest that West German police was basically Gestapo that changed the name? Because that's what MGB to KGB transition was. The status was changed from Ministry to Committee, that's it. The policy has been changed under Khrustchev, but thousands of the same butchers that committed massacres of 1930s were serving (often in the same offices) until late 1970s.
        pmachinery 6y ago
  - brabel 6y ago
    > I don't buy the "Chernobyl and Fukushima are note big deal" message that the low death toll numbers convey. Why not? What evidence is there to the contrary? These death tolls vary by a lot, but even the high end is quite low compared to fossil fuels. The fear people have of radiation seems to be much greater than reality would justify. This causes very serious problems, like evacuating hundreds of thousands of people unnecessarily after an accident, destroying their lives due to mostly paranoia[1], as well as slowing down considerably our efforts to lower CO2 emissions (like Germany shutting down all its nuclear facilities even if that causes thousands of deaths due to increased pollution[2]). [1] https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Japan-nuclear-shutdown-more-harm-than-good-study-f https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Japan-nuclear-sh... [2] https://grist.org/energy/the-cost-of-germany-going-off-nuclear-power-thousands-of-lives/ https://grist.org/energy/the-cost-of-germany-going-off-nucle...
    - mrtksn 6y ago
      Because direct death at the accident is not what makes it big deal but the numbers are used to argue just that.
      - orwin 6y ago
        what is a big deal then? Unusable area? Mining coal or rare earth for solar panel already do that for you on a two order of magnitude difference at least (not counting detroyed montaintops and water pollution). Population displacement? Yeah, again an order of magnitude inferior to dammage caused by mining (this time counting water pollution). Not counting when hydro power fail: two order of magnitude differential just counting china barrage failure. Would you dissmiss hydro power because of the barrage incident then? Because last time i checked, the death toll, the displacment toll and the lost land caused by hydro power were a lot more than nuclear for sensibly the same power production. Is it waste that grind your gear? Yeah, speak to the people who live near cadmium mines where nothing can grow anymore. Also a Co2 surplus in high atmosphere last around 100 000 years (order of magnitude here). Compare that to the dangerous radioactive waste. Also, coal mining and burning cause the area around to be more radioactive than the area around fukushima, or French uranium mines. Weird, no? You know why you really don't like nuclear power? Its because with solar panel, oil and coal, the externalities are paid by poor populations in China, India, Africa or south America. So its better for you (or me). Its because hydro power failure only happened in poor countries. Or rather, country you don't really know or care about. Italia, Brazil, China barrage failure each have death toll superior to fukushima + chernobyl counting displacement caused deaths (avoidable deaths).