Reply #7: This thread is a good excuse for me to bring something up...

[phantom power]

I'd like to take some of the arguments we throw around here and just put them in the context of "general society" and "reporting."

For instance: 40,000 people dying from automobile use each year, and just in the United States, and not even counting health effects from emissions, is considered mostly unremarkable. And although nobody likes it, pretty much everybody is aware of it, and in no way does it cause anybody to write environmental editorials in the vein of "we must ban automobile use for the future of mankind!" If nuclear energy were directly implicated in killing 40K people each year, what might we expect in the way of reporting, and public reaction, etc?

If it helps, I'm sure that there are many other kinds of comparisons, that don't involve even having to mention nukes. Feel free to suggest your own!

Again, this is not about our happy family here on E/E. We are in no way representative of the population at large. This is about the general population, and risk assessment, and also the choices made in reporting.