The famous Fukushima radioactive tuna fish and all of the other fish and bivalves in the sea.

[NNadir]

5. The reference for the death toll I attach to antinukism is from one of the most prominent medical journals...

...in the world, Lancet.

I reference often in this space, including many times, text with an excerpt, as I will now.

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).

I added the bold so that everyone, including the antinukes I hold responsible for this state of affairs can find easily, irrespective of their educational and reading level.

For convenience, I often round the number for the sum of women killed by antinukism and men killed by antinukism (6.67 million) up to 7 million per year, remaining well within the error bars. Even at 6.67 million, in the 14 years during which we've had people here whining and pissing in hopes of demonstrating someone will be shown to have died from radiation at Fukushima, while not giving a shit about the roughly 20,000 people who died from seawater in the same event, this works out to 93.₄ million deaths from air pollution.

The problem is a lot more serious than what "feel good" bourgeois conceits and practices like car pooling and riding mass transit. Right now there are about than 1.5 billion people on this planet who lack access to any form of improved sanitation. The issue with them is not about taking a train vs driving.

As for driving I would suspect, but cannot prove, that this number of people who lack basic sanitation includes the cobalt slaves in the "Democratic Republic" of Congo, who dig cobalt for bourgeois batteries so Westerners can declare themselves "green."

I find no benefit whatsoever to attaching riders to the problem on socioeconomic fantasies to cover for the consumerism in which we all participate.

Irrespective of socioeconomics it is clear from an engineering standpoint that nuclear energy is the only sustainable low carbon form of energy there is. All one needs to do is to compare the carbon intensity of France with that of Germany to see this.

Have a nice weekend.