4 ms·

How many people have died from nuclear testing?

godelski 5y ago
Hard to say tbh, but I'd wager less than a million. For comparison, that's about the yearly death rate (or rather early deaths, which is similar to how we attribute radiation deaths) from coal. Not fossil fuels, coal. The __magnitudes__ are vastly disproportional here. There's nothing to debate here except what we fear more. But our lack of fear over climate change is how we got here. Because the killer is slow moving and (mostly) invisible.
- drran 5y ago
  It's a good argument to replace coal energy with clean energy, but why we should replace dirty coal with dirty nuclear?
  - godelski 5y ago
    > dirty nuclear That's a bold assertion. Would you care to back it up? Nuclear does not produce carbon. It's one of the safest forms of energy we have. There's a reason France has one of the lowest emission rates in the world. Killing nuclear in the 80's and 90's is clearly one of the worst mistakes we've ever made. The mistake we're making now is pitting nuclear against renewables. There's a large scientific consensus that we should _complement_ renewables with nuclear. Use renewables where we can but it is a far better option than gas. That's the choice we are currently making. Let's not make the same mistake twice, there's a lot more on the line this time.
    - drran 5y ago
      Nuclear does produce radioactive waste. It's why Chornobyl, Fukushima, Kyshtym, and few other places are inhabitable. We should clean these dirty places before we call nuclear energy «clean».
freeflight 5y ago
Estimates for that actually exist, they put the number at around 340,000 to 460,000 people [0], and that's only in the US. [0] https://cms.qz.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/6043f-meyers-fallout-mortality-website.pdf https://cms.qz.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/6043f-meyers-f...
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
ThinkBeat 5y ago
A 1991 study by the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) predicted that some 2.4 million people would eventually die from cancer as a result of atmospheric testing globally. https://www.gcsp.ch/global-insights/75-years-later-nuclear-weapons-still-kill https://www.gcsp.ch/global-insights/75-years-later-nuclear-w... https://ieer.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/1991/06/RadioactiveHeavenEarth1991.pdf https://ieer.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/1991/06/RadioactiveHe...

Hard to say tbh, but I'd wager less than a million. For comparison, that's about the yearly death rate (or rather early deaths, which is similar to how we attribute radiation deaths) from coal. Not fossil fuels, coal. The __magnitudes__ are vastly disproportional here. There's nothing to debate here except what we fear more. But our lack of fear over climate change is how we got here. Because the killer is slow moving and (mostly) invisible.

drran 5y ago
It's a good argument to replace coal energy with clean energy, but why we should replace dirty coal with dirty nuclear?
- godelski 5y ago
  > dirty nuclear That's a bold assertion. Would you care to back it up? Nuclear does not produce carbon. It's one of the safest forms of energy we have. There's a reason France has one of the lowest emission rates in the world. Killing nuclear in the 80's and 90's is clearly one of the worst mistakes we've ever made. The mistake we're making now is pitting nuclear against renewables. There's a large scientific consensus that we should _complement_ renewables with nuclear. Use renewables where we can but it is a far better option than gas. That's the choice we are currently making. Let's not make the same mistake twice, there's a lot more on the line this time.
  - drran 5y ago
    Nuclear does produce radioactive waste. It's why Chornobyl, Fukushima, Kyshtym, and few other places are inhabitable. We should clean these dirty places before we call nuclear energy «clean».

freeflight 5y ago

Estimates for that actually exist, they put the number at around 340,000 to 460,000 people [0], and that's only in the US. [0] https://cms.qz.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/6043f-meyers-fallout-mortality-website.pdf https://cms.qz.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/6043f-meyers-f...

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

ThinkBeat 5y ago

A 1991 study by the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) predicted that some 2.4 million people would eventually die from cancer as a result of atmospheric testing globally. https://www.gcsp.ch/global-insights/75-years-later-nuclear-weapons-still-kill https://www.gcsp.ch/global-insights/75-years-later-nuclear-w... https://ieer.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/1991/06/RadioactiveHeavenEarth1991.pdf https://ieer.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/1991/06/RadioactiveHe...