Well, first, I don't believe your supposed source.
***And then we get to the point where I don't believe your source and it gets us nowhere. I'm going to drop this rabbit trail.
Second, people die everyday. It's not that 12 people will supposedly die (I don't believe it) but how much sooner would they die than without the reactor? Will they die at the age of 10? That would be serious.
***OK, that's good enough. At least you acknowledge it would be serious. Let's move on.
Will they die at the age of 80, after a lifetime of excess radiation exposure, that would be less serious.
***Agreed.
Like I've said before, I suspect you'd be lucky to detect any radiation from such a sunken carrier, never mind dying from that undetectable radiation.
***Your original post was comparing a wartime sunken carrier to the peacetime sunken Russian nuclear subs which have managed to moderate the nuclear reaction and maintain some semblance of containment. It's an apples and oranges comparison. If the carrier's rods were damaged, the containment breached, and the nuclear plant started a thermal runaway process, there would be considerably more radiation discharge. Certainly detectable, possibly becoming an ablative radiation pump into the open sea.
Checked out your Post #323 again, didn't see anything from the NRC that confirmed your statement:
From what I can see in the NRC’s 2004 Fact Sheet on the TMI Accident, they now acknowledge that even under NORMAL operating conditions, there are 12 deaths attributable to radiation release at nuclear plants.
You have a direct link to the NRC that says that?
***Your original post was comparing a wartime sunken carrier to the peacetime sunken Russian nuclear subs which have managed to moderate the nuclear reaction and maintain some semblance of containment.
Yeah, well your original post said mushroom cloud.