2

EnergyJustice writes:

Health Impacts & Coal Plants: There’s no shortage of data to show that individuals living near a coal plant are at higher risk for health problems than those who do not live near a plant.

In Delaware, years after residents requested a study, the Delaware Division of Public Health confirmed a cancer cluster in the six zipcode area surrounding NRG Energy Inc.’s Indian River coal plant. The study showed a cancer rate 17 percent higher than the national average.

[...]

Given that coal plants contribute 67 percent of sulfur dioxide (SO2), 23 percent of nitrogen oxides (NOx), and 34 percent of all mercury emissions in the nation, it is not surprising to notice increased rates of asthma, cardiovascular disease, and pre-mature and low birth-weight births in these communities.

According to the DailyMail:

Living near a power station WON'T damage your health

Who's right? Does the evidence we have suggests that there are major health concerns from living near a coal plant?

  • 4
    That DailyMail article refers to nuclear power plants, not coal power plants, so you're comparing apples with oranges... and the article reiterates all the usual myths and half-truths about nuclear power, so I'd take it with a bucket of salt in that regard as well... – DevSolar Mar 6 '19 at 13:10
  • Here's a recent metastudy with regards to coal. – Brian Z Mar 6 '19 at 13:24
  • 1
    Not only is there the nuclear versus coal confusion, but I am also unclear whether you are asking about correlation versus causation. (Living in an industrial area reflects on one's socio-economic health risks as well as direct pollution risks.) – Oddthinking Mar 6 '19 at 13:25