- "All we have to fear is fear itself, not the fearmongers who spread it" -
"Candles Kill Many More Than Nuclear Power"
- Chernobyl killed for sure at least 37 people (wikipedia) , but the figures going into 10s of thousands shouldn't be worried about ..OK I'll explain it each year in Europe there have been 200 extra cancer deaths per year occuring mainly at the end of the persons natural life ..so thats 4000 deaths mostly at the end of the persons natural life. ..that's not half a million Newspapers should be made to put a perspective warning next to every amazing figure in this case remember the extra radiation from granite rock in SW England 1,000 cancer deaths a year.
- Fukushima "As of September 2011, there were no deaths or serious injuries due to direct radiation exposures. Cancer deaths due to accumulated radiation exposures cannot be ruled out, but, according to one expert, might be in the order of 100 cases" The Radiation Effects Research Foundation
- yes there will be an increase in cancer, but the typical thyroid cancer was treatable and other cancers won't take tens of years to harm the body typically effecting people at the end of their natural life
- Some people decided to fly out of Tokyo to avoid possible radiation from Fukushima thereby giving themselves a much higher dose of radiation cos the notmal natural radiation in a flight is much more than that due to Fukushima.
- follow the money : will Greenpeace be making millions from compensation for all the deaths ?, no cos the reality never matches up to their disaster hype..
I think there is definite scope to kill all this anti-nuclear hype by offering a half million dollar compensation to every person under 50 years old killed by manmade radiation in a western country.
Hiroshima : The Radiation Effects Research Foundation 's website concludes that the number of excess deaths among 50,000 survivors who got a severe dose of radiation comes to only a few hundred, and certainly not as many as a thousand." ..Their page about Fukushima
- My god a sensible report on BBC about radiation ... ah it's cos he's not a journalist Professor Wade Allison, Emeritus Professor of Physics at Oxford and author of ‘Radiation and Reason
Dr Karls nuclear prog
In contrast, few in the west of England seem concerned at the natural radiation they are exposed to from the earth in the form of the gas radon, even though it is estimated to lead to more than 1,000 cancer deaths a year in this country.
- There is an article on deaths per kilowat hour ..it shows of course nuclear is one of the safest, but coal cos of normal dust and radioactive dust is 1000 times worse
- There is a strange effect that nuclear workers tend to have lower cancers than the comparible normal population .. perhaps due to activity or perhaps due to a positive effect on small does of radiation or something else.
- Don't Uranium miners die ? - stop . Remember if you closed nuclear and replace it with solar you'd have to cover million of roofs to match a nuclear power station.. and since roof work is very dangerous many more deaths would be recorded This site compares deaths per MW of electricity generated
- In comparison with coal even if uranium mining was incredibly dangerous you'd still lose many times more live days in a coal mine as you need 1000 times more coal to generate the same amount of electricity.. 50 coal miners die per year in America and 2500 in China.
- And don't forget for wind you have to consider all the miners who die in the operation to get all the material and energy in it's construction.
- Although activist sites sometimes mention cancer for Uranium miners ... which does seem to be true. It's perfectly plausible that pre 1995 safety controls weren't what they should be and 20 years of exposure to radioactive particles in your lungs should have effect, but again when put in perspective it's not bad.
20 years in other mining without proper safety gives you a higher than normal chance of cancer. Studies refer to Narajo people pre 1995. ..but remember correlation doesn't establish effect ..to establish cause and effect you'd need a much larger sample size and proper control group to give proper risk statistics e.g. Uranium miners lose an average of 100 days of life compared to a similar group of coal miners It's not like 50% of 40 year old miners who have cancer. The killer statistic is that cos in terms of power generation you need far more coal than uranium for the same power, the number of live days lost due to coal mining, and probably wind farm assembly is far more. ..remember in China coal mines
- Wow BBC Bang GTT gives some real science numbers about nuclear power from nuclear Scientist Gerry Thomas ... 20 minutes into the prog ..then I find months ago in all the hye C4 reported the same story Japan: "Nuclear panic is 'over-reaction' say scientists - Channel 4 News