Hell has frozen over

[stantond]

The notion that nuclear energy is 'unnatural' is farthest from the truth.  We are constantly surrounded by nuclear processes emitting radiation, albiet in low quantities.  The trouble starts when we concentrate and enhance nuclear effects.  Sometimes this has healing uses, such as in the medical field.  Other times, extreme devistation can result.  Except for mans use of fire, there has not been a more potent source for good or evil than nuclear energy.  It's a very wicked genie we let out of that bottle!


Regards,

Malta

[Gh0stFT]

who is right?
the pro's says 56 deaths
the contra's says 4000

looks like we need another Tschernobyl to get the final truth.

[Bruno]

who is right?
the pro's says 56 deaths
the contra's says 4000

No thats not what they say. There are 56 actual deaths that can directly attributed to the Chernobyl incident and the expected death toll will reach as high as 4000. That's one source.

Others say the expected death toll will reach 30000, 40000 50000 and 90000.

Attributing an illness, disease or condition to radiation exposure  is a very complicated thing to do. The extremist will jump to the conclusion that everyone who develops cancer,  etc... who may have been exposed to higher doses of radiation, that it means that the radiation must have been the cause. Studies done on those who may have been exposed to radiation from Chernobyl are inconclusive. Thus you have wildly different estimates.

Those deaths that can be directly attributed to Chernobyl is 56. All other numbers are guesses. Greenpeace itself is estimating 90000 deaths while the UN and WHO estimate 4000.

[lazs2]

56-90,000 what's the difference?  Still worth it in my opinion.

lazs

[mora]

Yep, who cares...

[Bruno]

56-90,000 what's the difference?

56 are real deaths.

90,000 are made up to scare people

However, Chernobyl was the result of terrible design and willful negligence by the staff. They ran an unsafe 'experiment' that went bad.