|
| Let me make clear to begin with so there is no
| misunderstanding: I am not a great advocate of
nuclear
| power nor am I advocating it here. But to be
objective
| about this, you are much more likely to die from coal fired plants
| than nuclear ones.
|

Depends where you are. Living close enough to Fukushima to be doused with fallout if Tepco loses control and/or caught up in a panic stampede out of Tokyo, simple death rates per kilowatt hour on a global basis do not mean much to me.

The death rates associated with the mining and burning coal could almost certainly be brought down by technology to control emissions and enforcement of safety regulations. The death rate associated with coal production and burning is a variable that can largely be controlled. The deaths resulting from a nuclear accident can at best be somewhat reduced on an ad hoc basis.

Moreover, I would question whether body counts are a useful or appropriate basis for comparison. I would suggest a few others.

(1) Cost to the power generator. Are there any historical cases of an accident at a fossil fuel generation plant essentially bankrupting a major corporation?

(2) Cost to the taxpayer. Are there any historical cases of accidents at fossil fuel plants hitting the taxpayer the way Chernobyl and Fukushima have?

(3) Amount of land area made uninhabitable. How does the displacement of residents in the worst fossil fuel accidents compare with Chernobyl or Fukushima? How does the displacement that could be expected from a fossil fuel plant accident compare with, for example, Indian Head (NYC) or San Onofre (San Diego) if these have accidents that resulted in the widespread dispersion of radiation?

(4) Nukes in unstable and/or undemocratic political regimes. If you are located such that the prevailing winds would blow the results of an accident in your direction, which would you rather have to deal with, the results of a fossil fuel accident (or just plain
effluent) or the fallout from a major nuclear accident?

I'm sure others can think of other points where the preference would be for fossil fuel burning.

EHK