4 ms·
Not true. As Japan pulled back from nuclear due to fears stemming from Fukushima accident, they increased coal reliance which has a direct impact on health of t
by macspoofing 6y ago
Not true. As Japan pulled back from nuclear due to fears stemming from Fukushima accident, they increased coal reliance which has a direct impact on health of thousands of people.
- xiphias2 6y agoWhat does that have to do with radiation?
- lupire 6y agoIt's an indirect effect, described slyly.
- RandomChance 6y agoMight not be what they meant, but under normal operations a coal plant can release significantly more radiation into the environment than a nuclear plant, via isotopes in the ash [1][3]. It’s still less than normal medical sources but it is much higher than a normal nuclear plant where radiological releases of any kind are actively watched for. (The source of the coal will determine the isotopes involved and the initial amount. [2]) This article [3] from Oak Ridge National Laboratory REVIEW (1993 I believe, so a bit dated) states "The population effective dose equivalent from coal plants is 100 times that from nuclear plants" [1]( https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/coal-ash-is-more-...) [2]( https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/1997/fs163-97/FS-163-97.html https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/1997/fs163-97/FS-163-97.html) PDF Warning: [3]( https://www.ornl.gov/sites/default/files/ORNL%20Review%20v26n3-4%201993.pdf#page=26 https://www.ornl.gov/sites/default/files/ORNL%20Review%20v26...)