<|begin_of_text|><|start_header_id|>system<|end_header_id|>You are an expert on climate change, human mobility and migration. Answer the question truthfully.<|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>user<|end_header_id|>Here are the title and abstract of a scientific paper probably related to climate change, human mobility and migration..
Title:"Reducing the Danger from Fires in Spent Fuel Pools."
Abstract:"This article reviews the case of the spent fuel fire that almost happened at Fukushima in March 2011, and shows that, had the wind blown the released radioactivity toward Tokyo, 35million people might have required relocation. It then reviews the findings by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in 2013 that the consequences of a loss-of-water event could be drastically reduced if spent fuel were moved to dry storage after 5years of pool cooling but that the probability of a spent fuel pool fire is too low to make this a requirement. Our atmospheric dispersion and deposition calculations using HYSPLIT for hypothetical releases from the Peach Bottom plant in Pennsylvania find average interdicted areas and populations requiring relocation larger than NRC estimates presented to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and support the NAS findings of errors and omissions in the NRC's cost-benefit calculations. Political pressures from industry on the NRC may be biasing its analyses toward regulatory inaction.."
I have six questions you need to answer.
Q1: Is this article is about 'human migration mobility': 1 = yes; 0 = no. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Q2: What drivers of migration and mobility does the article study? 0 = 'other', 1 = 'climate', 2 = 'environment', 3 = 'economic', 4 = 'conflict', 5 = 'political', 6 = 'social', 7 = 'family'. Answer with a number or a sequence of numbers separated by commas. Do not give a textual explanation. 

Q3: What is the overall sentiment of the article?:0 = 'neutral', 1 = 'negative', 2 = 'positive'. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Q4: What type of climate or environmental keywords are explicitly mentioned?:  0 = 'none', 1 = 'algal blooms', 2 = 'infestation', 3 = 'infectious diseases', 4 = 'ocean acidification', 5 = 'sea ice', 6 = 'acid rain', 7 = 'drought', 8 = 'cold wave', 9 = 'heat wave', 10 = 'glacial', 11 = 'wildfire', 12 = 'air pollution', 13 = 'biodiversity loss', 14 = 'coastal erosion', 15 = 'land degradation', 16 = 'deforestation', 17 = 'desertification', 18 = 'water pollution', 19 = 'diebacks', 20 = 'permafrost loss', 21 = 'sand mining', 22 = 'sea level rise', 23 = 'earthquake', 24 = 'tsunami', 25 = 'volcanic', 26 = 'flood', 27 = 'avalanche', 28 = 'landslide', 29 = 'downburst', 30 = 'thunderstorm', 31 = 'sandstorm', 32 = 'haze', 33 = 'storm', 34 = 'cyclone', 35 = 'blizzard', 36 = 'hail', 37 = 'snow', 38 = 'tornado', 39 = 'wind', 40 = 'hurricane', 41 = 'typhoon', 42 = 'other'. Answer with a number or a sequence of numbers separated by commas. Do not give a textual explanation. 

Q5: What discipline does the article belong to?: 0 = 'other', 1 = 'social science', 2 = 'natural science', 3 = 'arts and humanities', 4 = 'multidiscipline and interdiscipline'. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Q6: Does the article apply quantitative and/or statistical analysis?: 0 = 'no', 1 = 'yes'. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Use the following template: 

Q1 = [];
Q2 = [];
Q3 = [];
Q4 = [];
Q5 = [];
Q6 = [].<|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>assistant<|end_header_id|>Answer:
Q1 = [0];
Q2 = [];
Q3 = [];
Q4 = [];
Q5 = [0];
Q6 = [1].
Reducing the Danger from Fires in Spent Fuel Pools
This article reviews the case of the spent fuel fire that almost happened at Fukushima in March 2011, and shows that, had the wind blown the released radioactivity toward Tokyo, 35million people might have required relocation. It then reviews the findings by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in 2013 that the consequences of a loss-of-water event could be drastically reduced if spent fuel were moved to dry storage after 5years of pool cooling but that the probability of a spent fuel pool fire is too low to make this a requirement. Our atmospheric dispersion and deposition calculations using HYSPLIT for hypothetical releases from the Peach Bottom plant in Pennsylvania find average interdicted areas and populations requiring relocation larger than NRC estimates presented to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and support the NAS findings of errors and omissions in the NRC's cost-benefit calculations. Political pressures from industry on the NRC may be biasing its analyses toward regulatory inaction.