3 ms·

To be fair, the number of people killed directly or indirectly from Chernobyl (as well as children born with birth defects, higher cancer rates regionally, etc)

• docflabby 5y ago
  The number of people killed just by coal power plants in Europe is around 20k a year, choosing to abandon nuclear without clean alternatives in place first was irresponsible.
  • duped 5y ago
    I totally agree, but it's disingenuous to compare estimated indirect deaths from coal plants to direct deaths of a nuclear accident that was covered up for decades with no good estimate of the indirect deaths and illness from exposure.
    • dragontamer 5y ago
      > no good estimate of the indirect deaths and illness Don't we have Geiger counter that can measure the amount of radiation emanating from nuclear power plants, including Chernobyl?
    • jcranmer 5y ago
      > a nuclear accident that was covered up for decades The cover-up of Chernobyl lasted barely days. > with no good estimate of the indirect deaths and illness from exposure. Only a multitude of studies. The current consensus in the scientific community is that somewhere around 20,000-30,000 total deaths attributable to Chernobyl have or will occur.
    • throwaway894345 5y ago
      To the extent that the comparison is disingenuous, I would think it's because we're comparing the criminal mismanagement of a Soviet nuclear facility with ordinary coal facilities. Frankly Chernobyl wouldn't happen in the west (and thus using it as a reason not to invest in nuclear seems disingenuous), and certainly not with newer, smaller, and safer reactor designs.