Earthquake & tsunami hits Japan

[AndrewT]

I've just done a little research and found Wind Turbines have killed more people than Chernobyl did.

Are you able to expand?

Very tall people had their heads chopped off.

[Bongo]

Chernobyl caused 53 deaths apparently and this report says Wind Turbines have killed 67 people:
http://www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk/accidents.pdf

This page seems to suggest that Wind has a death rate between 50-100% of coal fired generation:
http://www.wind-works.org/articles/BreathLife.html

How does wind's mortality rate compare with that from other energy sources? Unfortunately, there is no simple answer. Part of the problem is that statistics on mortality rates for the full fuel cycle of coal, for example, are not readily available. And where available they use different units. Yet, it appears that the current mortality rate of wind energy of 0.15 deaths per TWh is roughly equivalent to that of mining, processing, and burning of coal to generate electricity according to some researchers. (This data doesn't include increases in mortality from the air pollution that results from burning coal.) Data from other researchers indicates that wind's mortality rate is about half that for the occupational mortality rate for coal.

Now given the huge number of deaths mining coal (4,746 in China along in 2006) and the relatively few deaths caused by Nuclear Power (63 in total: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_and_radiation_accidents#List_of_accidents_at_nuclear_power_plants for ~15% of the world's leccy: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/electricitygeneration.html)

My conclusion: Nuclear is safer than wind and coal.

[Longy]

I will take the over on 53 deaths caused by Chernobyl.

[Bongo]

The conclusion might be slightly different if I used The Chernobyl Union of Ukraine's estimate of 734,000.

[kinboshi]

http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2011/03/post-earthquake_nuclear_crisis

Another good read.

As for the relative dangers to human health/life coal is streets ahead of any other fuel source.

However,  the catastrophic disaster that could potentially occur with nuclear power is a far greater fear to the public.  Probably down to the lack of media focus on the dangers of the coal supply chain,  and the "science fiction" feel to nuclear power accidents.

[thetank]

Downplaying the impact of Chernobyl does any pro nuclear argument a great disservice.

Chernobyl be fucked up.

You don't have to be a Daily Mail reader to buy into the idea that Chernobyl scale incidents cause cancer.

[kinboshi]

I've spoken to a friend in Ibaraki prefecture and they are both frightened about what's happening in Fukushima (they're pretty much due South of Fukushima), but are more concerned about further quakes and of course tsunamis. He said that they all feel lucky compared to those hit by the tsunami.

It's also started snowing in Sendai,  the last thing they need there is bad weather when they're already short of food supplies and medicines.

[kinboshi]

Downplaying the impact of Chernobyl does any pro nuclear argument a great disservice.

Chernobyl be fucked up.

You don't have to be a Daily Mail reader to buy into the idea that Chernobyl scale incidents cause cancer.

All very true.  Chernobyl devastated an area and killed thousands,  although the exact figures can vary according to the source.

But it's also worth noting that Fukushima will not be another Chernobyl.

It doesn't mean nuclear power is safe,  but it doesn't mean it's the work of the devil. 

[Robert HM]

I will take the over on 53 deaths caused by Chernobyl.

+1

BBC mentoined tonight that UNESCO are suggesting the figure may reach 4,000.

Its not just the instant deaths that count or those that die from horrible radtion sickenss, it's the cancer suffers, the deformed foetus(es) that also count.

Please dont tell me that a few dozen were affected my Chernobyl

[thetank]

Downplaying the impact of Chernobyl does any pro nuclear argument a great disservice.

Chernobyl be fucked up.

You don't have to be a Daily Mail reader to buy into the idea that Chernobyl scale incidents cause cancer.

All very true.  Chernobyl devastated an area and killed thousands,  although the exact figures can vary according to the source.

But it's also worth noting that Fukushima will not be another Chernobyl.

It doesn't mean nuclear power is safe,  but it doesn't mean it's the work of the devil. 

Agreed

[Bongo]

It depends who you listen to really, it may reach 4,000 it may be over 750,000, it's not something we can ever really know, I just took wikipedia's word for it...

4,000 would be less than the number of coal miners that died in China in 2006 though, so it's hard to see Nuclear comparing that badly to Coal - and as stated above Wind is little better than Coal...

If you factor in Coal's contribution to global warming then the figures look pretty damning:

A quick google says 150,000 people were killed due to global warming in 2000 (source:http://sandiego.indymedia.org/en/2003/12/102258.shtml wtf?), and that rose to 300,000 in 2009 (http://trueslant.com/jeffmcmahon/2009/05/29/global-warming-death-toll/ another wtf from me).

From another side look at the Bhopal Disaster:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal_disaster

Estimates of deaths range from 4000-15000, with 500,000+ injuries.

And nothing nuclear in sight.

[Bongo]

Downplaying the impact of Chernobyl does any pro nuclear argument a great disservice.

Chernobyl be fucked up.

You don't have to be a Daily Mail reader to buy into the idea that Chernobyl scale incidents cause cancer.

All very true.  Chernobyl devastated an area and killed thousands,  although the exact figures can vary according to the source.

But it's also worth noting that Fukushima will not be another Chernobyl.

It doesn't mean nuclear power is safe,  but it doesn't mean it's the work of the devil. 

Agreed

That's basically what I was trying to say.

[doogan]

a new earthquake has hit japan a 6.0, shaken tokyo a bit and they have evac'd all final staff from nuclear plant as too dangerous , going from bad to worse

[kinboshi]

Staff have not left the plant.

They were told to stay indoors at the plant, whilst radiation spikes were monitored.

[doogan]

i was going off this

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/VIDEO-All-Workers-Evacuated-From-Fukushima-In-Japan-Nuclear-Plant-After-Surge-In-Radiation/Article/201103315953135?lpos=World_News_First_World_News_Article_Teaser_Region_0&lid=ARTICLE_15953135_VIDEO%3A_All_Workers_Evacuated_From_Fukushima_In_Japan_Nuclear_Plant_After_Surge_In_Radiation_