Re:Portable nuclear reactor program sparks controversy
by Tuna-Fish on Tuesday June 29, 2021 @11:05AM
(#27676835)
Doesn't change the end result. Hell, you can add every person who died in the atomic bombings to the nuclear tally (even though that makes no sense at all), and it still won't change the result.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Portable nuclear reactor program sparks controversy
by Retric on Tuesday June 29, 2021 @11:12AM
(#27676964)
No, you don’t get 2.5 million deaths per year from fossil fuel usage. Though a few seriously flawed studies have gotten some very extreme numbers.
For example respiratory diseases represent ~5% of all Chinese deaths or about 500,000 in 2020. Which is a horrific sign of air pollution except China also has 350 million smokers. Looking at the non smoker population you see air pollution as a major factor, but again not all air pollution is from fossil fuels.
Air pollution is also associated to strokes and heart attacks, but again other factors are involved.
Re:Portable nuclear reactor program sparks controversy
by karaterobot on Tuesday June 29, 2021 @11:23AM
(#27677149)
True, it is likely much higher[1], but the 2.4 million I cited comes from an older estimate that used different data.
[1] https://www.seas.harvard.edu/news/2021/02/deaths-fossil-fuel...
Re:Portable nuclear reactor program sparks controversy
by Retric on Tuesday June 29, 2021 @11:49AM
(#27677609)
Yet here’s one saying 1.05 million. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-23853-y
It’s easy to find flawed studies with silly results, the underlying reality is rarely so extreme.