Misconceptions

In normal operation, nuclear reactors do indeed release very small quantities of radioactive elements, mainly in liquid form, but also in gaseous form to a lesser extent. The mere fact that they are radioactive does not necessarily make them dangerous to the public. As specified by ASNR, "public health is not at risk anywhere in France due to authorized releases”.

Nuclear power plants have many advantages in terms of biodiversity protection: low carbon footprint, limited land footprint, limited impact of releases, etc. The only point of vigilance is the aspiration of fish, though it should be noted that no impact has been observed on the size of fish populations.

Radioactive releases from the nuclear accident did not have an observable impact on terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems beyond the immediate vicinity of the plant, and no impact is expected.

Discharges into the sea of "radioactive" water containing tritium had no impact on ecosystems. The water immediately returned to concentrations consistent with guidelines for drinking water.

The prolonged shutdown of Japan's nuclear power plants following the Fukushima accident brutally deprived the country of 30% of its electricity, which is still largely offset by fossil fuels (coal and natural gas), significantly increasing Japan's greenhouse gas emissions.

The Three Mile Island accident had no detectable health or environmental consequences. Nevertheless, it participated in an in-depth reconsidering of how to train personnel responsible for controlling nuclear reactors.

Nuclear fusion is promising, but nevertheless remains at the research stage and its commercial viability is very uncertain. Even in favorable scenarios, nuclear fusion will only supply a small percentage of global electricity demand by the end of the century.