Exactly. Chernobyl is FUD. All current reactors are different design and cannot be compared to Chernobyl. Nuclear is one of the safest way to produce a large

Exactly. Chernobyl is FUD. All current reactors are different design and cannot be compared to Chernobyl. Nuclear is one of the safest way to produce a large quantity of energy. There is no clean energy, harvesting and transforming energy takes materials and generates stuff that we don't want. Talking about bad perception, fear of radioactivity is also disproportionate. It might be because it is not something we can really feel with our senses, and so it has this magic/unknown aura. People working in nuclear power plant receive less than radiologist technicians, dentists, or fly attendants. Which probably means that the safety might be too high. We should be able to drop from few notches. If coal was the agreed standard of death/TWH then nuclear could kill 800 times more per TWH. The public safety standards for coal and oil is well accepted. No one when building a multi GWH coal power plant screamed for the caused deaths. An yet, with nuclear kill 800 times less, it is always seen as something that will wipe the neighborhood. It is irrational. It might be because of the bomb of the same name. Even though they are totally different designs (nuclear power plant do not detonate large amount of explosive to start a reaction). It is fine to be cautious, but we have to stay rational. We should not diminish the risk of radioactivity, but current nuclear power plant designs are safer, and when they fail (even when a tsunami hits it) it does not kill as many people (source: https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/safety-and-security/safety-of-plants/fukushima-daiichi-accident https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/safety-and-sec... https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/backstories/2324/ https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/backstories/2324/) There and XKCD for everything: https://what-if.xkcd.com/29/ https://what-if.xkcd.com/29/