Thanks for your factful reply :) Regarding the nuclear risk - it is driven by incidents. If the plant had not incidents, there would be no risk. E.g. the chil

Thanks for your factful reply :) Regarding the nuclear risk - it is driven by incidents. If the plant had not incidents, there would be no risk. E.g. the childhood leukemia risk is double inside a 5km radius, and there is no good explanation for this (except the occasional release of radioactive exhaust in case of incidents). (https://www.bfs.de/DE/bfs/wissenschaft-forschung/wirkung-risiken-ion/stellungnahmen/kikk-europa-und-usa.html https://www.bfs.de/DE/bfs/wissenschaft-forschung/wirkung-ris..., link is in German, sorry) Same is true for the nuclear plant workers. Their cancer risk grows linearly with their exposure - which I assume is also an effect of minor incidents, especially if you exclude lung cancer (smoking was quite popular in the 20th century...). See e.g. https://www.aerztezeitung.de/Medizin/Krebsrisiko-im-Kernkraftwerk-erhoeht-235208.html https://www.aerztezeitung.de/Medizin/Krebsrisiko-im-Kernkraf...