Low levels of radiation (from nuclear power) do not pose the health risks experts once feared

See ‘The Power of Nuclear’ Review: Reactors and Detractors by James B. Meigs. He is the former editor of Popular Mechanics and a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. He reviewed the book The Power of Nuclear: The Rise, Fall and Return of Our Mightiest Energy Source by Marco Visscher. Excerpts:

"The author assiduously debunks the myths surrounding the three iconic nuclear accidents. Fewer than 50 deaths can be proved at Chernobyl, he notes, while Three Mile Island and Fukushima produced no radiation fatalities. Even long-term studies have turned up little evidence of widespread health damage from the Chernobyl fallout. Could it be that “radiation is not nearly as terrible as we think?” he asks. Yes. In fact, it is indisputably true that low levels of radiation do not pose the health risks experts once feared.

“Fear of radiation,” one Chernobyl researcher concluded, “is a far more important health threat than radiation itself.” Nonetheless that fear soon put the nuclear-power industry on an unsustainable path. Regulators added layer upon layer of rules, going far beyond any recognizable safety benefits. The cost of building new plants skyrocketed. Most power companies decided that building nuclear facilities wasn’t worth the financial costs and political blowback—especially when they could receive huge subsidies (and plaudits) for building wind and solar farms instead.

But just as nuclear power appeared to be heading into the sunset, something extraordinary happened: Many environmentalists—ever more focused on climate change—began supporting the world’s most potent source of carbon-free energy. Meanwhile wind power and solar power proved unable to deliver on their inflated promises. Germany, which enacted the world’s most aggressive renewable-energy program while retiring its nuclear fleet, offers a cautionary example. The country now faces sky-high energy prices, falling industrial output and economic decline—while its carbon emissions have declined only modestly.

People with a “Small Is Beautiful” outlook may find this de facto “degrowth” policy laudable, but few nations want to follow Germany’s path. Japan is reopening many of the plants it shuttered after Fukushima, while Britain is building its first new reactors in three decades. In the U.S. there is bipartisan support for investing in nuclear technology.

Tech giants, including Google, Meta and Amazon, are making deals with nuclear startups to supply their power-hungry data centers with the energy from small, next-generation reactors. These tech initiatives came too late for Mr. Visscher to include in his narrative—the original Dutch version of the book came out in 2022—but they bolster his hope that nuclear power will provide a growing share of our energy mix."

"Indian Point’s closure pushed up New York’s carbon emissions, as well as utility bills. The move was a policy disaster driven by ideology rather than science."