I should have addressed this, we DO know what health effects there have been on populations which have been exposed in previous nuclear accidents. There were NO deaths from 3 mile island. Chernobyl were less than 50 up to 2005. Cancer rates do go up, but we can and DO treat those forms of cancer successfully.
Now, how many people died in car crashes in 2005?
“Car Crash Stats: There were nearly 6,420,000 auto accidents in the United States in 2005. The financial cost of these crashes is more than 230 Billion dollars. 2.9 million people were injured and 42,636 people killed. About 115 people die every day in vehicle crashes in the United States — one death every 13 minutes.” http://www.car-accidents.com/pages/stats.html
Thats jsut 2005, a completely unremarkable year with regard to statistics.
Now, it is clear that car crashes FAR FAR FAR outnumber deaths fron nuclear accidents. Yet you are willing to accept that. Why? Because you know more about the hazard and consider it more acceptable. Really, please, do put it into perspective, realistic perspective.
Chernobyl will be a wasteland for many years.
Again, I'm not arguing against nuclear power. But I don't want my children exposed to the small amounts of radiation you might find inconsequential.
50% of FReepers and probably 90% of the general population are too uninformed to understand the difference between getting irradiated by being in the vicinity of a radioactive source and getting contaminated by radioactive particles. Of corse neither does the media, so there’s no hope for any of these groups.