I never agreed that its outmoded or old tech.
At Fukushima Daichii died one worker of radiation poisoning and one in a crane incident. The evacuation killed 51 more. Scientific consense is, that the loss of life and cumulative lifetime would have been lower if there was no evacuation.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_airship_accidents
For the total number of airships, the loss of life (and airships) is quite high…
I explicitly wrote “civil nuclear power”. I know there were big incidents, especially in early military nuclear sites. Windscale and Kyshtym are two of those.
Yeah, read it. Also the article with the discussion on the death toll. 31 immediate deaths 60 attributable in the following two decades
The official WHO estimate with 4000 more cancer deaths until 2050 is based on the disputed LNT model. Even UNSCEAR itself says:
The Scientific Committee does not recommend multiplying very low doses by large numbers of individuals to estimate numbers of radiation-induced health effects within a population exposed to incremental doses at levels equivalent to or lower than natural background levels.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/apr/05/anti-nuclear-lobby-misled-world
Dr. Thomas shares that contrary to popular belief there is a scientific consensus that the Chernobyl accident has resulted in the deaths of less than 55 people as a result of radiation.
The two airship accidents with the most casualties count together 120 dead (USS Akron and Dixmude).
More people died in airship incidents than in civil nuclear power.
E: typo
I am not your enemy, I’m taking part in a discussion. Also this is my first post in this thread, stop talking like I personally offended you.
I explicitly wrote about the state of Israel and not the Jewish people. So the timeframe of my argument the founding of Israel and the decades after that. Jewish europeans settled there since the end of the 19th century, and for almost half a century it worked. The phrase started being used after that.
The Likud Party hat that phrase in it’s founding charter: “between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.”
Yes, it was used earlier by the PLO but back then the meaning was more like “take back what was ours”. It was not against the jews, they were there before the founding of Israel. It was against the forced taking of land by creating the state of Israel.
Extremist forces took it further, especially Hamas. But by then the sitation was already complicated enough for an easy solution…
Maybe if israeli hardliners didn’t support the founding of Hamas and assassinate Rabin they could have reached a peaceful solution almost 20 years ago?
If you thought just a little bit about what I wrote, you would know I was discussing the second graph.
Answer my points, not reinterpret them to fit your agenda.
Its interesting they use “most recent generation of turbines” but don’t do that on nuclear. Also WISE is not a credible source. It’s an anti-nuclear organisation with guys like Mycle Schneider on board.
Which source says 117g/kWh for nuclear? IPCC 2014 says 12g, UNECE 2020 about 5.1g (for EU28 nuclear).
There was a massive tsunami in the area killing almost 20k people, the power plant was not their first concern.
The guy died 4 years after the accident from lung cancer, not very common in nuclear power.