The data for this claim is found in this publication, which I produce every time some fool carries on about so called "nuclear waste."
It is here: Global burden of 87 risk factors in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019 (Lancet Volume 396, Issue 10258, 17–23 October 2020, Pages 1223-1249). This study is a huge undertaking and the list of authors from around the world is rather long. These studies are always open sourced; and I invite people who want to carry on about Fukushima to open it and search the word "radiation." It appears once. Radon, a side product brought to the surface by fracking while we all wait for the grand so called "renewable energy" nirvana that did not come, is not here and won't come, appears however: Household radon, from the decay of natural uranium, which has been cycling through the environment ever since oxygen appeared in the Earth's atmosphere.
Here is what it says about air pollution deaths in the 2019 Global Burden of Disease Survey, if one is too busy to open it oneself because one is too busy carrying on about Fukushima:
The top five risks for attributable deaths for females were high SBP (5·25 million [95% UI 4·49–6·00] deaths, or 20·3% [17·5–22·9] of all female deaths in 2019), dietary risks (3·48 million [2·78–4·37] deaths, or 13·5% [10·8–16·7] of all female deaths in 2019), high FPG (3·09 million [2·40–3·98] deaths, or 11·9% [9·4–15·3] of all female deaths in 2019), air pollution (2·92 million [2·53–3·33] deaths or 11·3% [10·0–12·6] of all female deaths in 2019), and high BMI (2·54 million [1·68–3·56] deaths or 9·8% [6·5–13·7] of all female deaths in 2019). For males, the top five risks differed slightly. In 2019, the leading Level 2 risk factor for attributable deaths globally in males was tobacco (smoked, second-hand, and chewing), which accounted for 6·56 million (95% UI 6·02–7·10) deaths (21·4% [20·5–22·3] of all male deaths in 2019), followed by high SBP, which accounted for 5·60 million (4·90–6·29) deaths (18·2% [16·2–20·1] of all male deaths in 2019). The third largest Level 2 risk factor for attributable deaths among males in 2019 was dietary risks (4·47 million [3·65–5·45] deaths, or 14·6% [12·0–17·6] of all male deaths in 2019) followed by air pollution (ambient particulate matter and ambient ozone pollution, accounting for 3·75 million [3·31–4·24] deaths (12·2% [11·0–13·4] of all male deaths in 2019), and then high FPG (3·14 million [2·70–4·34] deaths, or 11·1% [8·9–14·1] of all male deaths in 2019).
You are invited to open this comprehensive publication in one of the world's most prominent medical/epidemiological scientific journals and identify
anyone who has died from the storage of used nuclear fuel.
It is true 99.95% of the time that anyone making a statement about so called "nuclear waste" knows nothing, not the chemistry, not the physics, not the constituents of used nuclear fuel. Nothing. Zero. Zip. Most have never opened a science book on the subject in their long whiny lives.
The whole fucking planet is burning up from dangerous fossil fuel waste, otherwise known a climate change gases, and someone again wants to tell me about what they call, "nuclear waste?"
This moral and intellectual indifference is appalling.
At San Onofre, there is 4000 tons of used nuclear fuel, 95% of being unused uranium. Converted to plutonium, this uranium can be shown to have enough energy in it to provide all of the energy used in the United States per year (about 107 exajoules) for 2 years and 10 months.
The fission products therein also have considerable value, at least they would in a world not dominated by fear and ignorance. Stupidity however, is very popular these days. I wish I could say this is only true on the political right, but I can't.
It is appalling that people rule out the only viable solution to the climate crisis because they lazily repeat ignorant pabulum that they got from a cartoon vision of the world.
I'm a scientist, not a fool repeating tired slogans for 50 years with no observed justification for doing so. The nuclear industry is over 60 years old. It hasn't killed in that period as many people as will die in the next 24 hours because we
don't use nuclear energy. Opposition to nuclear energy
kills people, since nuclear energy
saves lives.
Prevented Mortality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Historical and Projected Nuclear Power (Pushker A. Kharecha* and James E. Hansen Environ. Sci. Technol., 2013, 47 (9), pp 4889–4895)
Asking someone who understands nuclear energy to not mention nuclear energy - and I do as obviated by my journal on this website - is exactly the equivalent of asking a medical virologist not to mention vaccines to address Covid.
Have a nice day tomorrow.
= new reply since forum marked as read
