Hacker News Reader

It is slightly disingenuous. Although it might be true that a coal plant emits more radioactive material overall, the concern with nuclear plants is the radioactive emission in the event of an accident, not the emissions during regular operation. Just wanted to bring up an important distinction. I personally still support nuclear energy.

View on HN

It's also almost certainly wrong in practice, given that the 2007 data in the article wouldn't include the Fukushima meltdown.

Even accounting for Fukushima and Chernobyl, coal has emitted more radiation per MWh.

No one can deny when fission goes wrong, it goes really wrong. Statistics are often ineffective influencing emotions.

When Naki was evacuated on ground of radiation levels that was orders of magnitude lower that that found naturally at Guarapari beach not a single person died. One year later the suicide count due to the emotional trauma caused by forced eviction exceeded 1000.

But coal and oil, working correctly, are destroying the planet.

To clarify, I'm pro nuclear. I mean it is very hard to fight irrational fears with logic. Like how flying is safer than driving per miles, yet many people are more afraid of planes than cars.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com