Actually, hydroelectric plant failures can cause 100+ kilodeaths. In terms of prompt fatalities, hydroelectricity is by far the deadliest power source.

Am I right in thinking that your figure is for inland hydroelectric power plants, not Tidal power generators?

I would be interested in how tidal generators can cause >100.000 deaths.

As of yet, no one was killed during the nuclear incident.

Weren't some engineers already killed during the explosion?

The one death reported so far was when the earthquake hit and he got crushed by a crane.

did the earthquake kill thousands, or did the total failure of a nuclear power plant kill them?

a tsunami can kill just as many people as an earth quake.

the subsequent deaths due to a destroyed power plant are another matter. from the article I get the impression that nuclear plants are built to withstand a lot of abuse and fuckups.

i see no reason to shy away from nuclear power. their power producing companies will know what kind of plants to run. we don't.

This is a company that has been caught falsifying safety reports, and had resignations because of it. I would not trust them to choose in the interest of everyone - but instead in the interest of the company.

> This is a company that has been caught falsifying safety reports, and had resignations because of it.

That's highly encouraging. That means that caught the people falsifying the reports and that they fired them.

If they had a "perfect" record, I would be incredibly worried.