Response to Comment on 'Prevented Mortality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Historical and Projected Nuclear Power'

Sovacool et al.'s analysis of our paper contains numerous errors, misinterpretations, and dubious assumptions. For instance, we make no presumption in our paper that nuclear power is the only major option to replace fossil fuels nor have we in the past, as evidenced by our other peer-reviewed publications. Furthermore, all of our results are based on complete fuel cycle analysis and are presented as mean values along with their ranges. Thus it is incorrect to claim that we single out the worst estimates for coal mortality. Contrary to Sovacool et al.'s assertions, our only bias is our belief that humanity's best chance of success for mitigating the daunting challenge of climate change is to utilize all available and proven means.