4 ms·
(1) People will die if they haven't already. Nuclear related deaths are drastically under-reported, because all governments try very hard to make nuclear look s
by hristov 12y ago
(1) People will die if they haven't already. Nuclear related deaths are drastically under-reported, because all governments try very hard to make nuclear look safe. When people die from Fukushima they will be reported dead from cancer and other diseases and not from the nuclear fallout. This may already be happening.
(2) Your argument about this being the worst case doesn't hold either. This is not nearly the worst case. I can think of many worse cases, such as a well educated and trained terrorist getting a job in a reactor.
In fact what happened in Fukushima is not particularly unlikely. What happened was something to be expected for a type of reactor that was built to last 40 years and was installed in an earthquake zone.
- taylorwc 12y agoI've never read anything that hints at nuclear-related deaths being underreported intentionally, though it appears hard to quantify the toll from catastrophic events. Can you point toward some sources?
- hristov 12y agohttp://www.counterpunch.org/2013/03/07/fukushimas-nuclear-casualties-2/ http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/03/07/fukushimas-nuclear-ca...
- Turing_Machine 12y ago"When people die from Fukushima they will be reported dead from cancer and other diseases and not from the nuclear fallout." The relationship between radiation exposure and increased cancer risk is well understood.
- bayesianhorse 12y agoAnd yet proponents of nuclear energy run around claiming nobody died because of Fukushima.
- hindsightbias 12y agoI, for one, will believe Tepco over my lying eyes that containment structures exploded.
- Turing_Machine 12y agoNo one died because of Fukushima. A statistically insignificant number may die from cancer in the future. Compared to the risks assumed in everyday life, it is a trivial number.