▲ 2206 ▼ Young climate activist tells Greenpeace to drop ‘old-fashioned’ anti-nuclear stance (www.theguardian.com) submitted 2 years ago by sv1sjp@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world 1121 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) No, I'm saying that saying the radiation concerns specifically of coal output isn't a concern with regards to health. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Womble@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) You're right coal deaths are just confined to mines, respiratory illnesses and excess cancers from chronic low dose exposure. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) it's fucking awful and causes way more deaths than nuclear power plants. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Womble@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) No, I'm saying that saying the radiation concerns specifically of coal output isn't a concern with regards to health. So chronic low level exposure to radiation is fine? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 1 point 2 years ago I'm not saying it's fine, I'm saying it feels like an order of magnitude less of a concern compared to all of the other bad things that can happen from coal smoke. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Womble@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) You're right coal deaths are just confined to mines, respiratory illnesses and excess cancers from chronic low dose exposure. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) it's fucking awful and causes way more deaths than nuclear power plants. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Womble@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) No, I'm saying that saying the radiation concerns specifically of coal output isn't a concern with regards to health. So chronic low level exposure to radiation is fine? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 1 point 2 years ago I'm not saying it's fine, I'm saying it feels like an order of magnitude less of a concern compared to all of the other bad things that can happen from coal smoke. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) it's fucking awful and causes way more deaths than nuclear power plants. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Womble@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) No, I'm saying that saying the radiation concerns specifically of coal output isn't a concern with regards to health. So chronic low level exposure to radiation is fine? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 1 point 2 years ago I'm not saying it's fine, I'm saying it feels like an order of magnitude less of a concern compared to all of the other bad things that can happen from coal smoke. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Womble@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) No, I'm saying that saying the radiation concerns specifically of coal output isn't a concern with regards to health. So chronic low level exposure to radiation is fine? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 1 point 2 years ago I'm not saying it's fine, I'm saying it feels like an order of magnitude less of a concern compared to all of the other bad things that can happen from coal smoke. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 1 point 2 years ago I'm not saying it's fine, I'm saying it feels like an order of magnitude less of a concern compared to all of the other bad things that can happen from coal smoke. permalink fedilink source parent