>The majority of health effects from Chernobyl were from the evacuation, not the accident. Check the WHO reports. No, 6000 cases of thyroid cancer from Chernob

>The majority of health effects from Chernobyl were from the evacuation, not the accident. Check the WHO reports. No, 6000 cases of thyroid cancer from Chernobyl were not caused by the evacuation, it was caused by the fallout. And the topic you are trying to dodge is that nations all over europe had to spend money to screen for these cancers for decades after Chernobyl, they had to feed wildlife special food, sanitize large areas of land and so on. The EU even had to pay for a new sarcophagus, despite never haven gotten a single kwh from Chernobyl. And it hasn't stopped costing money yet. Nothing else (at least in peacetime) that humans do can have such consequences from mistakes made by a few individuals. We see the same hidden costs in Sellafield, where Norway - who exports power to the UK, they don't get any - are volunteering to pay for Sellafield since an accident at sellafield could have severe effects on food production near Oslo, the capital of Norway. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/dec/05/sellafield-nuclear-site-leak-could-pose-risk-to-public https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/dec/05/sellafield-... Notice how the 2.5 billion pounds of yearly hidden costs I told you about earlier here is described as a "shoestring budget". The hidden subsidies given to nuclear power is found everywhere if you just scratch the surface a little bit. In summary; precisely because it's not clean, it's also neither cheap nor safe.