Yes, I am serious. I said the plane falling happens more often, not that it is worse as a singular event.
Unfortunately it is a problem with human psychology that we respond more strongly to a singular large event than to consistent low-level events.
Some of the discussion on this page has suggested Chernobyl killed around 60k, directly and indirectly. Certainly a tragedy, and a huge one at that, but it is also the only major nuclear disaster. The second worst (until we fully understand the current Japanese incident at least) remains Three-mile island, where there are no confirmed deaths I am aware of.
So, we're comparing approx 60k deaths, over the course of approximately 60 years, which works out as about 10k deaths a decade, against aviation accidents of, as you said yourself, approximately 15k a decade.
By those numbers, approximately 50% more people die each year from aviation accidents than from nuclear-power-related injuries. It's just that Chernobyl is a big story, but we hear about plane crashes all the time.
Unfortunately it is a problem with human psychology that we respond more strongly to a singular large event than to consistent low-level events.
I agree with that in general, although my opinion on this particular comparison differs.
we're comparing approx 60k deaths, over the course of approximately 60 years
Sorry to be nitpicking, but I'm not sure where the 60 years are coming from. However, since there's no hard data to rely on I'll even concede that plane accidents may have accounted for the same or slightly more "directly related" deaths in the same timeframe.
But: This is only a single datapoint. And a relatively "lucky" one.
The surrounding area around Chernobyl was sparsely populated and quickly evacuated. This is not representative for the locations of the majority of nuke plants, and certainly not for the Fukushima area.
If we imagine a worst-case scenario in Japan, with Tokyo right around the corner, then the second data-point could already change the equation in a drastic way.
This is why I think analogies to plane-crashes or traffic-accidents are invalid.
Unfortunately it is a problem with human psychology that we respond more strongly to a singular large event than to consistent low-level events.
Some of the discussion on this page has suggested Chernobyl killed around 60k, directly and indirectly. Certainly a tragedy, and a huge one at that, but it is also the only major nuclear disaster. The second worst (until we fully understand the current Japanese incident at least) remains Three-mile island, where there are no confirmed deaths I am aware of.
So, we're comparing approx 60k deaths, over the course of approximately 60 years, which works out as about 10k deaths a decade, against aviation accidents of, as you said yourself, approximately 15k a decade.
By those numbers, approximately 50% more people die each year from aviation accidents than from nuclear-power-related injuries. It's just that Chernobyl is a big story, but we hear about plane crashes all the time.