What other metric would you use though? It seems to me the top-level comment is arguing "I think nuclear is scary so therefore statistical risk analysis is invalid"
Impact on eco systems and economy, injuries, and maybe other effects that are not easily compressed into a single number.
I don't disagree that Deaths/GWh is one of the most important statistics on the safety of energy production. But while we often quantify safety of roads/vehicles by deaths/billion length units driven, one assumption is it is highly correlated to other safety indicators such as injuries. Coal will probably be even worse considering these statistics and nuclear will probably still fare well.
One example I am aware of: Germany still monitors contamination of mushrooms and other wildlife in bavarian soil [1]
One example I am aware of: Germany still monitors contamination of mushrooms and other wildlife in bavarian soil [1]
[1] http://doris.bfs.de/jspui/bitstream/urn:nbn:de:0221-20191007...