this piece really affected me to the point of tears and 'crying out'.

Do the morons pushing this nonsense report a likely death toll? Units of radioactivity against background? Any fucking science at all?

No, they don't. They rely on ignorance that allows crying "radioactive" to cause deaths from fossil fuel waste, which is killing the planet.

There are zero antinukes who give a rat's ass about fossil fuels.

We can always find ignoramuses who know no science whatsoever claiming that any radioactivity release requires panic. Notably they do not care a whit about the far more prevalent toxicology of PM_2.5, PAH's and other far more deadly and wide spread effects from fossil fuel waste, from which no one can escape.

These effects actually kill people, about 7 million people per year:

Global burden of 87 risk factors in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019 (Lancet Volume 396, Issue 10258, 17–23 October 2020, Pages 1223-1249).

Fossil fuel selling antinukes couldn't care less about these 70 million deaths each decade from their fossil fuel salesmanship.

In fact, they come here to SELL fossil fuels, rebranding them as "hydrogen."

A Giant Climate Lie: When they're selling hydrogen, what they're really selling is fossil fuels.

As for radioactivity:

Every human being on the planet is radioactive from the essential element potassium.

The fact that ignoramuses come around claiming that any exposure to radioactivity is a tragedy is a reflection of why the planetary atmosphere is collapsing. It is also a reflection of a poorly educated public not giving a rat's ass about the destruction of the planetary climate.

The days when ignoramuses can sell fossil fuels with antinuke rhetoric, insipidly screaming "RADIOACTIVE!!!" are coming to an end. The planet is burning and the "renewable energy will save us" pro-fossil fuel scam has clearly failed, and failed dramatically.

New Weekly CO2 Concentration Record Set at the Mauna Loa Observatory, 431.73 ppm

Nuclear energy need not be risk free to be vastly superior to all the forms of energy about which antinukes couldn't care less, notably fossil fuels. It's the last best hope of the human race, and the contempt displayed by the fossil fuel industry in pushing this line of crap is a crime against humanity, one dependent on ignorance.

Have a nice day tomorrow.

(along with small amounts of real science) - to a subject where hype is almost invariably the 'go to' for so many.

It's really just plain sad that such a huge portion of the population has become so seriously misinformed over the years. And PARTICULARLY when contrasting serious health consequence and global impact of nuclear generation - against the very clearly demonstrated ills presented in its counterpart in fossil fuels. It's a complete no brainer.

Tragic that so many have opted for the soft brain approach ... We will spend generations in deep regret for our folly.

I consider everything ever written here by the author this OP to be fossil fuel promotion, no exceptions.

Of course the fossil fuel industry bad mouths nuclear energy. It is the only technology capable of eliminating the use of fossil fuels.

Criticism of nuclear energy doesn't equate to promotion of fossil fuels, any more than criticism of renewable energy equates to promotion of fossil fuels. That's a logical fallacy and a deceptive argument.

Hydrogen generated from solar, wind or hydro is not a fossil fuel. Hydrogen is not a fossil fuel. That is misinformation.

The water of the Columbia River is also threatened by radioactive contamination seeping from the Hanford site. Those who dismiss or downplay the concerns about this issue are complicit.