All in all in terms of gigawatt-hours over fatalities nuclear power is the safest 24x7 base load energy source ever devised by humankind.
Those bizarre life loss versus Watt hour or statistics are about as specious as we can get.
Allow me to show this with something more familiar to people
It is difficult to find the total orbital miles each shuttle has flown, but the info I could find was 537,114,016 miles for the total fleet, and missing the last shuttle launch. Given that there were 14 fatalities in the program, that works out to an astounding 38,365,287 orbit miles per fatality, probably the safest means of transportation ever - no doubt.
But quite frankly, shuttle astronaut was a rather dangerous occupation.
There were 135 Shuttle flights. 2 total losses with 14 astronauts killed. That tells a different story.
So we probably ought to avoid the statistic game.
Fukushima was a '19th century fail' because in the 1800s the human race already had the technology to make water-tight compartments to secure precious things such as emergency backup generators. That had no business being in the basement. TEPCO really managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory there.
Thank you for proving my argument. I don't give a damn about the failure mechanism, but the fact that bean counters, politicians, managers with no engineering background, and sheer engineering hubris combine to make sure that these things will indeed fail.
I looked up readily availble historical data of the area in which Fukushima was, data gathered by the Japanese for hundreds of years, open source data, freely available to all, and with visible artifacts of ground truth for the cynical among us. That plant was going to fail. The Tsunami that hit it was not among the biggest that ever hit the area, and there were going to be more. Why it was there? I don't know. But it was going to fail.
WestinghouseAP1000NuclearPowerPlant.jpg">this will convince you.
Didn't think so. I thought pasting in Westinghouse's own artistic rendition as background would make these folks seem glad that it was in their back yard, but they're as grumpy as ever. And that pitchfork looks threatening.
Perhaps you need to address that we have been lied to in the past, and just like an abusive husband who is going to clean up his act and never hit his wife again, perhaps there is a reasonable expectation that we are being served up yet another lie
I know that you would like to cast me as one more phobic anti nuc nut. I'm not. We'll either go back to nuc power, or enjoy Dark ages part 2. I do believe that modern designs are much more safe. I do believe that we have progressed much in design.
But consider this. You and those of your ilk, believe that most people are really really stupid. It oozes out of your posts. You know how things are, and if anyone disagrees with you, they are stupid. Not just wrong. Your superiority is unquestionable.
And you come across that way every time you or one of your brethren tries to tell us how awesome it is and how great things are now. You seem to expect people to look at the Fukushima plant blowing up and saying "How do I get a piece of this?"
And respectfully, you and yours are helping to poison the atmosphere as much as any fear of nuc power. People just expect more lies, even if you aren't lying. People expect that in 30 years, when a plant blows up, that you and your's will be saying, "Well sure! That was an antiquated plant design from 2015, Today, we have plants that are really safe!"