I saw that and thought "no way". And that is the case because that headline is misleading.<p>There is a rather large editors note defending their framing of this key piece of information:<p>> As a general clarification, ounce for ounce, coal ash released from a power plant delivers more radiation than nuclear waste shielded via water or dry cask storage.<p>I was suspect of the headline having lived ~8 miles from a coal burning plant. Most people in the community that cared to know there was radiation emitted in the pollution knew that. Our community also had issues with NORM (naturally occurring radioactive material) from local natural gas fields so thoughts or concerns about radiation were not outliers.<p>Not defending coal but, yea, not a fan of this articles framing.