> outside the geographical areas most affected by radiation, even in locations within Fukushima prefecture, the predicted risks remain low and no observable increases in cancer above natural variation in baseline rates are anticipated.[13] In comparison, after the Chernobyl accident, only 0.1% of the 110,000 cleanup workers surveyed have so far developed leukemia, although not all cases resulted from the accident.[14][15][16] However, 167 Fukushima plant workers received radiation doses that slightly elevate their risk of developing cancer.
The hysteria of your statement doesn’t appear to be substantiated by a dispassionate look at the facts.
Considering the magnitude of the damage as well as how rare it is, is a very valid point.
And it's sometimes forgotten that 10s of thousands of people had to leave their homes.
Though some googling reveals that the main contaminant is Cesium-137, which has a 30 year half life. That will fade into background radiation long before that, even ignoring cleanup operations.
They've already reopened parts of the closed area.
At the pace we're going, we're tolerating to make the whole planet a burning hell for the comming millions of years. So I would say we have a pretty high tolerance to disaster, as long as it's happening to our children rather than us.
The hysteria of your statement doesn’t appear to be substantiated by a dispassionate look at the facts.