Reply #22: Nuclear energy is 300 TIMES safer than coal on a deaths/TWh scale [View All]

[wtmusic]

so OK, if you want to consider nuclear as being unsafe then you're undoubtedly far more concerned about coal, which has caused about 15 deaths in the US since you posted - or even rooftop solar (about 12 times more dangerous than nuclear):

"Rooftop solar is several times more dangerous than nuclear power and wind power. It is still much safer than coal and oil, because those have a lot of air pollution deaths.

Rooftop solar can be safer <0.44 up to 0.83 death per twh each year). If the rooftop solar is part of the shingle so you do not put the roof up more than once and do not increase maintenance then that is ok too. Or if you had a robotic system of installation.[br />
World average for coal is about 161 deaths per TWh.
In the USA about 30,000 deaths/year from coal pollution from 2000 TWh.
15 deaths per TWh.
In China about 500,000 deaths/year from coal pollution from 1800 TWh.
278 deaths per TWh.

Wind power proponent and author Paul Gipe estimated in Wind Energy Comes of Age that the mortality rate for wind power from 1980–1994 was 0.4 deaths per terawatt-hour. Paul Gipe's estimate as of end 2000 was 0.15 deaths per TWh, a decline attributed to greater total cumulative generation.

Hydroelectric power was found to to have a fatality rate of 0.10 per TWh (883 fatalities for every TW·yr) in the period 1969–1996

Nuclear power is about 0.04 deaths/TWh."

http://nextbigfuture.com/2008/03/deaths-per-twh-for-all-energy-sources.html

When you say you're suspicious, that you don't buy it, etc. etc. fine - but realize these emotions are not based on fact.