> The Chrenobyl reactors weren’t even housed in containment buildings, they were housed in what’s best described as a shed.

And why was that allowed? Because of quality regulation?

Got any examples of any presently operating civil power reactors that don’t have their reactor cores in some kind of containment structure?

Others I guess the answer to your question is: fuckwit communists were running the place at the time.

Chernobyl happened while I was alive. It wasn’t that long ago. The leader of the Soviet Union who presided over the disaster (Gorbachev) died only 3 years ago.

Aside from that, “because communism” is not a serious answer.

Whether a deregulationist considers themselves communist or capitalist is a red herring: being in favor of dangerous deregulation spans many different national economic persuasions.

> In the entire history of civil nuclear power "unknown parties stole the radioisotopes" has never happened.

This reads a bit like "why do we need a QA department when we don't have any bugs"?

The reason nobody stole the stuff is because everyone has, by international law, security and armed guards making sure they don't.

The Goiânia accident was stupidity, not malice, so you can't predict how many people would die if it was done maliciously from how many were killed. My understanding is what keeps people (relatively) safe from this type of attack at the moment, is the public deployment of radiation sensors since 9/11, which we know about because of people with radioisotopes in them for medical reasons getting caught by them.

The Chrenobyl reactors were housed in what’s "best described as a shed" because that was cheap. Same for all of the other design issues with those reactors: it made them cheap.

The rules that make reactors expensive are written in incidents.