There may have been fatalities at both types of generating plants due to electrocution or falls, or some other reasons. But there have been no deaths attributable to radiation in the United States.
There has been only one "melt down" and it was only a partial one in the United States. That was at Three Mile Island, and there were no deaths attributable to radiation there, either.
But what about deaths from breathing problems and lung cancer attributable to pollution from coal fired plants?
What about deaths in the coal mining industry which no doubt trump deaths in mining uranium?
Answers & Comments
Verified answer
There may have been fatalities at both types of generating plants due to electrocution or falls, or some other reasons. But there have been no deaths attributable to radiation in the United States.
There has been only one "melt down" and it was only a partial one in the United States. That was at Three Mile Island, and there were no deaths attributable to radiation there, either.
But what about deaths from breathing problems and lung cancer attributable to pollution from coal fired plants?
What about deaths in the coal mining industry which no doubt trump deaths in mining uranium?
Take a look at these:
http://neinuclearnotes.blogspot.com/2006/06/risk-a...
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf06app.htm
I say both, pollution and nuclear melt downs
Yea, what pisgahchemist said, he is smar and responsible.
Steam... Thats why they seldom use it anyplace
I give up which one is it
maybe hydro energy?