That's nice, but we do know that burning fossil fuels kills a huge number of people [0]. Moving away from fossil fuels will require some form of nuclear power. Much of Europe has successfully transitioned most of their power to nuclear [1], so it's not like the concept is some experimental sci-fi dream. From an environmental standpoint, nuclear is by far our cleanest option based on all the information we have.

[0]: https://qz.com/568450/fossil-fuels-kill-more-people-every-ye...

[1]: http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-pro...

Is the "full effect" more than a million deaths a year?

Because that's how many people coal kills. And Im not talking about global warming. I am instead only talking about the pollution deaths.

If Chernobyl happened like 3 times every single year, that would still be safer than coal, TBH.

> If Chernobyl happened like 3 times every single year, that would still be safer than coal, TBH.

More like 300, assuming 4000 (as per the IAEA) deaths from Chernobyl.

Is this satire?