Conversation
![David Watson 🥑](data:image/svg+xml,<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="96" height="96"><rect fill-opacity="0"/></svg>)
Post your reply
Just to make the math clear: That's about 320 million years of human life wasted because of stupidity
Correction: 320 M years is correct
80 years per life
4M lives lost
40 lives lost in Chernobyl100,000x more deaths because of fear than because of the accident
4M lives lost
40 lives lost in Chernobyl100,000x more deaths because of fear than because of the accidentThe level of disingenuity...
1. Doesn't engage
2. Blocks
3. Claims to chair a nuclear consulting company
4. But look, it's just a front. It's an anti-nuclear organization!
Well played, well played. I was about to fact check and then I reread. Well played indeed!
I wouldn’t attribute the lives lost as being due to pollution, I would attribute them to causing energy to be more expensive limiting its availability for the global poor.
Using coal
Show more
Safety standards had already increased
That said, even with the safety standards of the past, nuclear is vastly safer than any other source of electricity
More details in my article on the topic:
unchartedterritories.tomaspueyo.com/p/why-nuclear-
or it could have saved lives by leading to fewer nuclear accidents thereafter
Fear of nuclear killed many more than nuclear energy ever did.
It’s estimated that 100,000 to 200,000 women had abortions from fear of radiation after Chernobyl.
jnm.snmjournals.org/content/jnumed
Sorry, buts thats not true.
Most of the plants that were cancelled in the US for instance just had these problems:
- liberalisation of energy markets: harder to predict the revenues
- cost overruns
- delay in construction.
This contributed mostly to the decline of NPPs.
And why, my friend, were there cost overruns and delays in construction that exploded just around Chernobyl?
![](data:image/svg+xml,<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="1200" height="600"><rect fill-opacity="0"/></svg>)
So the fossil fuel industry not only denied climate change, they also helped to make sure that the easy solution to it is no longer available. Love those guys.
There's a ton of uranium everywhere. If not, we use Thorium. We can also use breeder reactors. Current estimations of nuclear energy suggest we have enough for millions of years of operation
Wind and (especially) Solar are very big contenders!
I‘m not following, Chernobyl indirectly caused 40 mm deaths, but only 40 directly? And by indirectly you mean the life loss of not building more nuclear?
Asserting that Chernobyl caused 40,000,000 deaths is going to require a LOT of evidence. This is greater than the current population of Ukraine.
How do you know that Fear prevented 400 additional nuclear plants from being built? That's my big question.
World Health Organization (WHO), as part of a UN Chernobyl Forum estimated that 4,000 people could eventually die from radiation exposure as a result of the Chernobyl disaster.
This is a tiny fraction of the cancer deaths that would have been caused if Chernobyl ran on coal.
We were told that ten thousands in Europe got cancer because of Chernobyl. Isn´t that true?
Indeed, it's not true
The level of cancers was comparable or lower than in other areas not affected by Chernobyl's radiation
What are the odds that without Chernobyl a more serious nuclear accident would have happened leading to the outright ban of nuclear reactors world wide?
Low. Chernobyl was a shit show. Most NPPs have way better security.
And without Chernobyl we would have built newer, better, safer NPPs
This doesn't take into account the risks of losing valuable land for hundreds of years. You can't rule out incidents with nuclear power plants and the risk of these increase with the number of plants. It's very difficult to compare a world with vs without those plants.
My article did:
unchartedterritories.tomaspueyo.com/p/why-nuclear-
In short: Nuclear + accidents uses waaaaaay less land than solar panels and wind
Terrible economics and massive delays killed nuclear power. No one is stopping it from being built. There is no anti-nuclear movement to speak of.
But you won't see the industry take responsibility. They prefer to deflect blame to others. Whiners.
Economics due to regulation, in part due to Chernobyl
Until this year, the US's agency that regulates nuclear, NRC, did not have a mandate to approve nuclear, only to increase its safety. Crazy!!
it was all planned to tie europe to ruzian gas and oil, paid to green parties. so yeah, fuck those guys, they have to pay for all they did, because now they feel master of the world while shitting in a hole in the ground.
You don’t count the thousands of radiation related death as direct casualties?
Then you have very few death related to oil and coal. Few people have actually been hit by a piece of coal or drowned in an oil pit.
Fucking lobbyists liar.
I know you want the details, so here they are. Look for the section on Chernobyl
Your numbers are just wrong Tomas. Chernobyl didn't even kill the famous 3 Chernobyl divers (2 of whom are still alive, one died of a heart attack many years after the meltdown). We've been lied to about the effects of dosages of radiation.
You can debate the specific number of ppl who died in Chernobyl, but not the order of magnitude
I take your point but the evidence I see suggests otherwise. Bhopal chemical plant, Banqiao dam collapse, others, killed vast numbers, but didn’t stop or slow those industries. A more likely fundamental cause is competing industries that are at threat of obliteration by
Show more
Westerners didn't care about Banqiao because that happened to them not us. Nuclear is something that can happen to you!
Here are the presentation slides from the most recent version of the paper
aeaweb.org/conference/202
There's a great irony in the fact that a major root of today's global warming problem is the "anti nuclear" "green movement" of yesterday.
That's funny: "The main “pollution” from nuclear energy is the disposal of spent rods. The only natural resource required for nuclear energy are water and uranium or plutonium."
Does the paper consider the benefits reaped by Gazprom in terms of higher sales?
What if nuclear power plant disasters are black swan events? Then a traditional statistical approach would be highly misleading. sciencedirect.com/science/articl
Cuan cierto y poco discutido impacto, el no haber hecho algo.
En este caso era tan simple como no hacer la estupidez de desmantelar NPP’s y dejar de construir nuevas.
El populismo y el miedo no son buenos consejeros
Fukushima caused a lot of excess deaths... by scuttling the Chinese Gen2 reactor construction program and the permitting of inland nuclear plant sites. They built coal plants instead, resulting in a lot more pollution related deaths.
It did not. That is misinformation. The IAEA has done many studies that prove what you claim is false.
Fukushima may have done just as much evil.
The paranoia about radiation is borne of fanatic hollywood culture...
And Fukushima. It gave Germany's government a pretext to close nuclear in favour of gas to pursue the long standing but weird policy of deliberately making themselves dependent on Russian gas.
not really - a bit of radioactive Iodine - that was undesirable- life expectancy has continued to increase till covid.
Are you saying 40 million people died as a result of Chernobyl? That’s nonsense. You could possibly argue that the accident reduced the life expectancy for a lot of people - but even that is very difficult to prove.
Crazy "democracies". Run by the weak for the weaker to become the weakest societies. Yay
Quote
Generation Atomic
@Gen_Atomic
but like.... it's not tho
#nuclear #trump #eatingthedogs #debate #nuclearpower #fyp
Yes! Well said. Today about 23,000 people will die from fossil fuels. Same yesterday. Same tomorrow. About 8.5 million deaths each year (Harvard study). Switch to Fission and it's zero. Who really cares about you? Or rather do you care about your children or their children? Move.
Do you have a source for the claim that the construction of NPP declined drastically because of Chernobyl? Construction starts were declining since the 70s.
Finally academics show how deadly nuclear power is. It's the most dangerous energy know on earth and costed million if lives.
Boom 
Thanks! Thanks to Anatoly Dyatlov and its cronies.
Thanks! Thanks to Anatoly Dyatlov and its cronies.Quote
Christian @flowersinspace
@christianvanck
History's Hidden Assholes: The Nobodies Who Fucked Everything Up (and some unsung Heroes)
Forget Hitler, Stalin, and the usual suspects in your high school history books. It's time to shine a spotlight on the real MVPs of mayhem - the obscure dipshits who stumbled their way into changing...
You should read "Manual for Survival: A Chernobyl Guide to the Future" by Kate Brown to learn about the possible real numbers of victims and also to grow up a little bit..
