8 Comments
User's avatar
KopfUp's avatar

Nice example if stupid statistics. In this case a headline like "Ukraine killed 4 million people" would also be true. Or "oil industrie". I prefer "stupidity kills". In this case Chernobyl in deed, because maintenance and handling of this accident it couldn't handled more stupid. But without any impact, because birth is 100% responsible for death, so nothing else can held responsible...

Expand full comment
Joachim Klement's avatar

I admit, it is a clickbait headline :-)

Expand full comment
Martin Schwoerer's avatar

"And this doesn’t even start to account for the damage caused to the climate", exactly, not to mention how much farther along the road towards decarbonized transportation we could be (hence, one might add all the additional lives lost due to urban air pollution and petro-political wars).

Expand full comment
UK Lawman's avatar

The surprise is not the deaths + from Nuclear, but low deaths. Add that disasters had specific causes: Chernobyl lacking safety, and Japan building Nuclear in tsunami areas.

If UK bought SMRs from Rolls Royce and other nuclear from Czech Republic, we could have clean reliable energy, and investment in British plant & workers.

BUT for some reason HMG is blind to this.

Expand full comment
Joachim Klement's avatar

100% agree.

Expand full comment
Joseph Shupac's avatar

Interesting, but does this take into account the fact that the first oil price spike ended around 1985? How much was the fall in oil prices, rather than Chernobyl and the anti-nuclear movement, responsible for the move away from nuclear?

Also, how many will the Fukushima disaster kill by comparison?

Expand full comment
Joachim Klement's avatar

All good points and I honestly fldin’t know the answer.

Expand full comment
mak's avatar

Clever clickbait, great article, kudos!

Expand full comment