Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

"Disaster Proves Nuclear Power is Safe"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:39 AM
Original message
"Disaster Proves Nuclear Power is Safe"
Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 11:42 AM by marions ghost
OK I know this is South Carolina, but here's an opinion piece by Clint Wolfe that appeared in the Greenville News today. All the lies that fit, they print apparently. Don't worry, be happy. It's fine for the nuclear industry to cause the damage that TEPCO's Fukushima Daiichi has, and will, cause. No big deal.

These Nuclear Industry people are just not rational. :shrug:

"Disaster Proves Nuclear Power is Safe"----------

"...the bad news is that this seemingly incredible sequence of events really happened, resulting in enormous human suffering from the effects of the quake and the tsunami. With respect to the very serious situation with the nuclear reactors, some countries are hesitating in their headlong rush to employ nuclear energy. Although the initial reaction of two utilities in the process of building new nuclear plants in South Carolina and Georgia is to carry on, they will be undoubtedly slowed by insistence on incorporating Japans lessons learned (something the nuclear industry does as a matter of routine anyway). Anti-nuke forces will seize the opportunity to insist on obstructing new construction.

So now youre waiting for the good news, right? The good news is that the bad news relative to the reactors performance wasnt all that bad. Although the quake and the tsunami apparently took more than 25,000 lives and left hundreds of thousands homeless, the events at the nuclear plants have thus far killed no one and the human health effects are likely to be minor to nonexistent.

George Monbiot, an avid British environmental activist, has recently proclaimed that, because of Fukushima, he now supports nuclear power. He reasons that, if 50-year-old technology absorbed the brunt of these brutal natural disasters without resultant loss of life and posed no more risk to human health than is apparently the case, the technology must be very safe.

(snip)

It has been obvious to those trying to present a factual representation of the real risks of energy alternatives that anti-nuclear forces portrayal of nuclear energy and its risks are based on myths, superstition and a proclivity for liberal use of misinformation and falsehoods. They also are prone to resorting to trying to discredit pro-nuclear advocates without engaging them in a discussion of the facts. They question the credibility of advocates who may have, or at one time had, a connection to the nuclear industry. Its sort of like saying, Because you are or once were a teacher your opinions on education should be discounted.

http://www.greenvilleonline.com/article/20110425/OPINIO...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Desertrose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:40 AM
Response to Original message
1. Thre's just too much stupid in the world....nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:50 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. So I looked up this George Monbot guy
Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 11:55 AM by marions ghost
the writer of the article is quoting...interesting reading. Monbot says he's an environmentalist, but this is what be believes after Fukushima:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Monbiot

Monbiot once expressed deep antipathy to the nuclear industry. He finally rejected his later neutral position regarding nuclear power in March 2011. Although he "still loathes the liars who run the nuclear industry",<34> Monbiot now advocates its use, having been convinced of its relative safety by what he considers the limited effects of the 2011 Japanese Tsunami on nuclear reactors in the region.<34> Subsequently, he has harshly condemned the anti-nuclear movement, writing that it "has misled the world about the impacts of radiation on human health ... made ungrounded in science, unsupportable when challenged and wildly wrong." He singled out Helen Caldicott for, he wrote, making unsourced and inaccurate claims, dismissing contrary evidence as part of a cover-up, and overstating the death toll from the Chernobyl disaster by a factor of more than 140.

So who is this guy and what's his agenda?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robdogbucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #1
33. Number 4 Fukushima reactor has temps rising despite continued infusion of water
Monitoring rising temperatures

The operator of the troubled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant is carefully monitoring the situation at the Number 4 spent fuel pool, where the water temperature is rising despite increased injections of cooling water. Tokyo Electric Power Company, or TEPCO, says it will inject 210 tons of water into the pool on Monday, after finding on Sunday evening that the temperature in the pool had risen to 81 degrees Celsius.

The utility firm had earlier limited the amount of water being injected into the pool to 70 tons a day, saying the weight of the water could weaken the reactor building, which was already damaged in last month's hydrogen explosion. On Friday, TEPCO found that the pool's temperature had reached 91 degrees, so it began injecting 2 to 3 times the amount of water.

TEPCO says the pool's water temperature dropped to 66 degrees on Saturday after water was injected, but started to rise again, to 81 degrees. The operator says the water level in the pool was 2.5 meters lower than normal after 165 tons of water were injected on Sunday. It is carefully monitoring the water level and temperature to avoid further troubles.

The Number 4 spent fuel pool stores 1,535 fuel rods, the most at the nuclear complex.

Monday, April 25, 2011 12:04 +0900 (JST)

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/25_12.html?play



Shills can insert into the anal aperture


rdb

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 08:10 PM
Response to Reply #33
36. not encouraging
thanks for putting the situation on the ground up front here.

Safe :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:57 AM
Response to Original message
3. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Opinions are OK
Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 12:13 PM by marions ghost
and we can talk about them without insulting each other, I think. Here's another link for you, if you like George Monbiot. This presents both sides.

And there ARE two sides. Better get used to it. :dilemma:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/democracy-now/vandana-shi...

At this link Amy Goodman interviews pro-nuclear George Monbiat and also Vandana Shiva, an Indian anti-nuclear spokesperson. Very good videos here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Traveler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. 1000-2000% above EPA limits
Radioactive iodine showing up in California milk. This is just beginning. We really can't predict how many will die from the consequences of this event. Claiming that it is all over and that no harm was done simply damages your credibility.

Trav
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fatbuckel Donating Member (518 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. Level of radiation measured would have to exist for 100 years for it to equal one chest X-ray.
EPA: Harmless traces of radioactive iodine from Japanese nuke plant showing up in milk from Washington and California

Mar 3/1/2011

The federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reports that radioactive Iodine is showing up in milk from Washington State and California, but at levels it says are far below any threat to public health, including for infants. Oregon is awaiting its own milk testing being conducted by the EPA.

Meanwhile, Lincoln County Commissioner Don Lindly told his fellow county commissioners yesterday that citizens can be assured that trace amounts of radioactive iodine that have been discovered in Oregon pose no health threat to us. Lindly said Oregon health officials are monitoring the situation very carefully. He said he was told by one state health official that the level of radiation measured would have to exist for 100 years for it to equal one chest X-ray.

THE SKY IS FALLING!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 08:22 AM
Response to Reply #11
50. A chest X-ray is something we either choose to have or not to have
We are allowed to weigh the advantages of having one over the disadvantages of having one and make the decision our self if it is worth having it or not. It is an optional procedure.

That is not the case when someone is blowing radioactive isotopes into the atmosphere and into the air we all have to breath.

Do you see the difference?

Don
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fatbuckel Donating Member (518 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-27-11 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #50
80. The point is...thats as much radiation as is being propagated. It was a REFERENCE.
Let`s discuss the moral implications of chest X-rays over Christian Healing procedures. Oh,but that doesn`t make any sense. And how about all the nasty crap blown into the air by coal-powered generation plants? Got a choice there?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chris_Texas Donating Member (707 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #6
12. According the the UN World Health organization...
55 people have died so far from Chernobyl -- a disaster that makes this look like a firecracker. And yes, the WHO does anticipate this number will eventually climb to a few thousand within the next fifty years maybe. Or maybe not. If you live in America you are likely reading this in the fallout plume of about a thousand nuclear bombs, and you aren't dead.

In other words RELAX. Seriously. Just relax.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. That UN WHO report on Chernobyl is widely regarded as a whitewash & sham.
And that's just death; you think childhood thyroid cancer is a walk in the park?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chris_Texas Donating Member (707 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #14
24. You can read the report yourself
I did, and did so LOOKING for flaws because I had heard the number was in the zillions. Their work looks professional and exhaustive. And while this might challenge your world-view, you will have to make a decision: accept science or don't.

If not, if you choose to operate on faith, that's cool. But remember it the next time you accuse a teabagger or climate change denier of the same thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. I do accept science. There are lots of SCIENTISTS who dispute those conclusions.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2006/mar/25/energ...

"At least 500,000 people - perhaps more - have already died out of the 2 million people who were officially classed as victims of Chernobyl in Ukraine," said Nikolai Omelyanets, deputy head of the National Commission for Radiation Protection in Ukraine. " (Sutdies show) that 34,499 people who took part in the clean-up of Chernobyl have died in the years since the catastrophe. The deaths of these people from cancers was nearly three times as high as in the rest of the population.

"We have found that infant mortality increased 20% to 30% because of chronic exposure to radiation after the accident. All this information has been ignored by the IAEA and WHO. We sent it to them in March last year and again in June. They've not said why they haven't accepted it."



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chris_Texas Donating Member (707 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #27
57. Wow, an editorial! Well you certainly trumped my science then
http://www.who.int/ionizing_radiation/chernobyl/en /

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs303/en/inde...

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2005/pr38/...

As I said, the deflection of attention AWAY from the real disaster here is sickening to me. It's like finding a woman's body, skirt hiked up and panties hanging off one ankle, and crying in outrage because her Gucci purse is lying in a puddle of mud. Or screaming because the collapse of the WTC towers wiped out a flock of pigeons.

At least thirty thousand people are already dead, as many as a million people have lost EVERYTHING they had to live for, a significant portion of the industrial base of one of the world's leading economic powers is destroyed, children are walking miles through the mud every day to try and feed themselves and the surviving elderly. They are cold and starving and desperate for help, and yet some are focussing on the least important aspect of this for purely political reasons.

The facts are clear: this is a bad nuclear accident. It is going to have some impact, some of it will last a long time. Some few people might die, others will lose their stuff. But compared to the rest of the disaster that has already occured this is neither a surprise nor is it deserving of the ridiculous level of distracting attention it has recieved. And I personally think anyone using this to advance a political agenda, however well intentioned, is no better than that douchebag Bush using 911 to sell his police state insanity.

As you are posting here at DU I have to believe that you are a compassionate good person. Save the anti-nuclear agenda for some other day and help keep the focus where it belongs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 07:44 PM
Response to Reply #57
71. Nice try.
Being concerned about the ongoing clusterfuck at Fukushima does not prevent one from being compassionate about the human toll- the serious, ongoing, heartbreaking human toll- that has occurred due to the Earthquake and Tsunami.

But please, spare me the concern about this being a 'distraction'. It is a serious, very serious nuclear accident. This is a political site, and nuclear power- the decision to pursue or not pursue it- is a political decision. This accident highlights some of the very real concerns many of us have about nuclear power, above and beyond the very real environmental and health costs which follow from these "unthinkable", "impossible", "once in 1,000 year" accidents, (of which the world has had a few, now) To wit: The tendency on the part of financially interested parties to cut corners and save money wherever possible, whether that is using questionable containment schemes like the Mark I, which was raising objections back when Nixon was in the WH, or whether it is storing large amounts of high-level spent fuel in the same complex and building, but outside the reactor, rending the very concept of 'containment' moot, particularly in a large, complex-wide event which has the potential to render the entire area inaccessible to the very personnell who would be counted on to repair cooling systems or facilitate additional cleanup and containment measures.. And frankly, the complete unpreparedness of everyone from local governments to the people who build and run these plants, to handle an accident of this level. It was pretty clear during the first week at Fukushima, that no one had the first fucking clue what to do. TEPCO was essentially abandoning the plant, ready to allow the whole thing to go up and do-- whatever, and the PM of Japan had to order them to get the fuck back in there and deal with it. I'm sorry, but if you can't be bothered to plan for the absolute worst case scenario, you shouldn't be in charge of one of these things.

So let me get this straight; in the wake of a major nuclear accident, the only other 'scale 7' in history, you honestly expect people NOT to question whether nuclear power is really such a good idea? Did you think that, as the Deepwater Horizon was spewing oil into the gulf, people wouldn't reassess offshore oil drilling? Come on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 09:45 PM
Response to Reply #71
77. +++++
:applause:

Now IS the time to say no to nuclear power, if ever there was one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-27-11 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #71
81. Well said.
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 05:31 AM
Response to Reply #24
41. Real nuclear scientists do not sugar-coat the Fukushima meltdowns.
How dare you abuse the name of "science" for your baseless, with-us-or-against-us rhetoric?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

QUOTE:

"On the 20th Anniversary of Chernobyl WHO and the IAEA published the Chernobyl Forum Report, mentioning only 350 sources, mainly from the English literature while in reality there are more than 30,000 publications and up to 170,000 sources that address the consequences of Chernobyl."
(Sherman, 2011)

Just how does the United Nations IAEA manage to ignore half a million to a million dead Eurasians? It just so happens I've been going through some of the aforementioned excluded studies, and I found some interesting commentary pertaining to just that question.

"These findings indicate that the spectrum of developmental defects generated by incorporated radioactivity in humans may be much greater than derived by international radiation committees from the follow-up of Japanese A-bomb survivors. The findings are compatible with a particularly high radiosensitivity of the fetus... In contrast to this, the International Commission on Radiological Protection ICRP has postulated a threshold dose as high as 100 mSv in Publication 90 of 2003 for effects after prenatal exposure. They and other committees exclude radiation effects by Chernobyl fallout referring to the very low doses which were derived for the population."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. When do you suppose the folks near Fukushima will get to go home, huh?
Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 12:14 PM by Warren DeMontague
Oh, here's your answer: NEVER.

This IS an unprecedented nuclear disaster, and the fact that prevailing winds and geography have apparently pushed the worst of the contamination out over and into the Pacific Ocean (which means it's TOTALLY GONE... right?) does not mean that this monumental radiological clusterfuck can be soft-pedaled by the same sort of nuclear industry apologists and cost-cutters who gave us the Mark I containment scheme in the first place, or who came up with the absolutely BRILLIANT fucking idea of storing the spent fuel in the reactor buildings.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chris_Texas Donating Member (707 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. They will go home a lot sooner than....
Do I really need to fill in the rest?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. Yeah.
Because that area is likely to be uninhabitable for the forseeable future. And if you know anything about radiation and long-term radioactive contamination, you know that statements like "look! no one has died yet!" Are essentially meaningless.

I think it's telling that, with 3 reactors in various states of meltdown, your biggest problem is that people aren't as enthusiastic for nuclear power as they were a few months ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chris_Texas Donating Member (707 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 03:08 PM
Response to Reply #13
25. Hiroshima and Nagosaki were ground zero for nuclear BOMBS.
Anything not vaporized was power-washed with radiation. Thought you aught to know.

Apparently "uninhabitable forever" doesn't mean a whole lot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. Yeah. I do know that. How much radioactive material, in tons, went into those, as you put it, BOMBS?
Now how much high-level radioactive material is at the entire Fukushima complex?

In Tons.

A nuclear bomb explosion and a nuclear power plant meltdown are two very different things. A nuclear bomb explosion kills a lot of people quickly, but the high-level radioactive waste generated is actually, quantitatively, quite less.

A nuclear power plant meltdown has the opportunity to contaminate a large chuck of land for a long period of time. This is why you can live in Hiroshima or Nagasaki, or visit the Trinity site, but you can't spend a whole lot of time in Pripyat.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chris_Texas Donating Member (707 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #26
56. To be clear: you believe...
That this powerplant in Japan is releasing more radioactive material than a ground level nuclear fission explosion?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #56
67. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were air bursts, as I'm sure you're aware.
But, then, those were also the examples YOU gave.

Again, both cities are now Habitable. Pripyat is not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
closeupready Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #3
20. Nice attempt at deflection.
Not working, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robdogbucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 05:38 PM
Response to Reply #3
34. Accurate? Check this video out once
URGENT: Japan now admits Fukushima at 154 trillion Bq's/Day and West coast Radiation forecast,Part1

Amazingly informative YouTube 10-minute or so video presentation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2wLbwuJeMM&feature=shar ...

"Maybe you don't want that chest X-Ray..."

As if we had a choice about radiation coming on the winds. This Canadian video also cites that the Canadian government has moved the radiation monitors from Vacouver inland to Kamloops. Not pretty on the West Coast, especially B.C.


Shill comments can be inserted in the anal aperture


rdb

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 05:51 PM
Response to Reply #34
35. "why are we putting up with this?"
he says in the middle of this video--he's in British Columbia.
"You need to pay attention."

He says re. North America:

Don't drink the milk.
Don't drink open water.
Don't go out in the rain.
Don't eat out of your vegetable garden.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Art_from_Ark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 03:47 AM
Response to Reply #3
39. Perhaps you aren't aware of the mandatory evacuations of, first, a 12-mile
radius from the Dai-ichi plant (approximately 230 square miles of land, not counting ocean), and now the proposed mandatory evacuation of another couple hundred square miles because the radiation readings there have been consistently high. So far, a total of more than 400 square miles of land may become depopulated indefinitely because of this nuclear flustercluck.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 05:34 AM
Response to Reply #39
43. You can't wake a man who is only pretending to sleep.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 06:56 AM
Response to Reply #39
46. right
It's insulting to the people of Fukushima and environs to suggest that all is OK and nobody will be affected, displaced or harmed as a result of the nuclear disaster. An insult.

Thanks for making the point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Art_from_Ark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 07:48 AM
Response to Reply #46
48. My city has been accommodating evacuees from Fukushima
Those people have been forced to leave their homes mostly because of the nuclear disaster. The city is offering free radiation screening for them, and has been recently moving them from shelters into single-family housing in the numerous public housing units that up to that time had been vacant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 07:17 AM
Response to Reply #39
47. Fukushima Farmers
were in Tokyo yesterday, carrying their beautiful, unwanted cabbages...

http://apnews.excite.com/article/20110426/D9MRA6OG0.htm...

"Farmers, who brought the cows to highlight the milk ban and plight of animals left behind in the evacuation zone, took turns shouting their frustrations into a microphone, their words carried over a loudspeaker mounted atop a van, as lunch-hour passers-by in the busy office district stopped and gawked at the animals in the back of two trucks.

"We have no dreams. No hope. Each day, I ask myself 'how do I live?" shouted Kazuhiko Suzuki, 70, from Fukushima.
-----

And how is this situation NOT hurting anybody?!? :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Art_from_Ark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-27-11 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #47
79. Fukushima farmers have really gotten screwed
Even if they're in an unaffected area, it is extremely difficult for them to sell their produce outside of their own 5500 square mile prefecture. It would be like if everyone suddenly started shunning farm products from Connecticut.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:08 PM
Response to Original message
5. The earth's atmosphere didn't catch on fire, did it? Huh?
Proof! And if you don't look too closely, nobody's been killed. Nobody's gotten sick. Nothing bad has happened. And if you don't look at all, nothing bad ever will happen! So there.

P.S.: You libruls!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #5
15. Nuclear Sanity is a LIBRUL thang, dontcha know?
Notice how "liberal" is used in the article, to associate any reasonable questioning of Nuclear Power with those dangerous left wingers:

"It has been obvious to those trying to present a factual representation of the real risks of energy alternatives that anti-nuclear forces portrayal of nuclear energy and its risks are based on myths, superstition and a proclivity for liberal use of misinformation and falsehoods." (Clever!)

So can we assume then, that the majority of Nuclear Energy advocates (even in the face of Fukushima) are conservatives--or even far right, like the writer of the article?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TorchTheWitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 05:12 AM
Response to Reply #15
40. You are aware that the common definition of liberal is plentiful/ample, right?
In the context of that sentence the word liberal refers to the most common definition - that being plentiful/ample as in "I like cake with a liberal amount of frosting". Could also refer to another definition of the word liberal which is "not strict" or "loose" as in "The liberal rules are intended to be more of a guideline and aren't set is stone". Nothing having to do with politics.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 06:16 AM
Response to Reply #40
44. oh sure I get it
But thanks for the definition and your point is taken. However I believe the wording of this has everything to do with politics.

Many readers of the article don't care about nuances of language and will just hear "liberal" in association with a string of negatives. Certainly this would be true in Greenville SC, the home of Bob Jones University, where they teach the newer definitions of 'liberal.' But since UPI pickled this up, there will of course be more conservative readers elsewhere buying the spin and propagating it.

"Liberal" --in any sense--has become a negative epithet in right wing circles thanks to Rush & Co. Also people don't read things now, they just skim, looking for buzzwords.

Even this subliminal, weaselly use of the word is enough to imply that nuclear sanity is a liberal position. True conservatives are pro-nuke. That's the point.

--Are you familiar with the metaphor, "dog whistle?" That's what this use of the word liberal is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:15 PM
Response to Original message
8. Safe, my ass. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #8
23. Thailand agrees, bowing to public pressure...
Edited on Tue Apr-26-11 12:54 PM by marions ghost
Ministry backs call to defer nuclear plants
IAEA warns Thai public not yet ready for them
Published: 26/04/2011 at 12:00 AM

The Energy Ministry has proposed Thailand delay plans (by three years)to have its first two nuclear power plants in 2020, after the International Atomic Energy Agency said the country was not ready for the projects.
http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/233712/ministry-b...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:21 PM
Response to Original message
9. Article must be controversial
Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 01:11 PM by marions ghost
A few minutes ago this article in the Greenville News was easily accessible online. Now (10 minutes later) it's only accessible with a subscription... :thumbsdown:

That's Murka for ya.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 01:10 PM
Response to Original message
16. April 26 = 25th anniversary of Chernobyl
Edited on Tue Apr-26-11 12:53 PM by marions ghost
In Europe they are not forgetting that April 26, 2011 is the 25th anniversary of Chernobyl.
Easter Monday is a day of demonstrations there: :thumbsup:
------------
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5g-RY...
Thousands in France mark Chernobyl with protests
By Arnaud Bouvier
STRASBOURG, France Thousands staged anti-nuclear protests around France on Monday, demanding reactors be closed on the eve of the 25th anniversary of Chernobyl and after Japan's Fukushima nuclear accident.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aerows Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 01:18 PM
Response to Original message
17. No, it proves, just like the BP oil spill did
that the public will be lied to repeatedly. I LIVE on the Gulf Coast, and I know for a fact the obfuscation that took place. Tar sheets washed up, and it was only reported locally, though I could see it for myself since I live a mile away.

I don't trust a thing being said about the disaster, because those reporting on it, and those in charge of overseeing it have already been caught in omissions, half-truths and out-right lies. It's BP all over again, except this time it is about 15 times worse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #17
21. This is what we are up against...
Edited on Tue Apr-26-11 12:51 PM by marions ghost
in trying to get the truth to be told about nuclear power. And yes it's just like the Gulf Disaster, brought to you by BP. Here's another pro-nuclear mouthpiece touting the amazing "safety record" of the nuclear industry in the face of Fukushima:

Andrew Reynolds, deputy and chief of staff at the Office of the Science and Technology Adviser to US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, described nuclear power as a remarkable industry because when you think about the safety record, its second to none.

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2011/04...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 01:18 PM
Response to Original message
18. They found plutonium in the soil near the plant.
Getting the tiniest speck of plutonium in your body will give you cancer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
closeupready Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 01:20 PM
Response to Original message
19. Yes, it does - Double Plus Safe, In fact.
:) :) :) :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. Meanwhile, today at Ground Zero Fukushima:
TOKYO, Japan, April 25, 2011 (ENS) - Despite increased injections of cooling water, the water temperature is rising in a spent fuel pool at the damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant on Japan's Pacific coast.

The plant's operator, Tokyo Electric Power Company, says it will inject 210 tons of water into the Number 4 spent fuel pool on Monday, after finding on Sunday night that the temperature in the pool had risen to 81 degrees Celsius. The Number 4 spent fuel pool stores 1,535 nuclear fuel rods, the most at the nuclear complex.

TEPCO engineers are trying to balance the amount of water needed to keep the nuclear fuel covered with the structural integrity of the reactor containment building. NHK TV reports that the utility company had been limiting the amount of water being injected into the pool to 70 tons a day, for fear that the weight of the water could weaken the reactor building, which was damaged in last month's hydrogen explosion.

"We will conduct further water spray depending on the conditions of spent fuel pools, if needed," TEPCO said in a statement Sunday.

On Friday, TEPCO found that the temperature in the Number 4 spent fuel pool had reached 91 degrees, so it began injecting two to three times the amount of water as before. TEPCO says the pool's water temperature dropped to 66 degrees on Saturday after water was injected, but is now rising again.

more at:
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/apr2011/2011-04-25-01.h...

Sounds like a real safe situation, doesn't it??? :yoiks:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 03:26 PM
Response to Original message
28. +1 -- Newspeak -- !!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #28
30. Yes, as in "Fukushima Proves that Nuclear Power is Safe"
Blackwhite is defined as follows:

...this word has two mutually contradictory meanings. Applied to an opponent, it means the habit of impudently claiming that black is white, in contradiction of the plain facts. Applied to a Party member, it means a loyal willingness to say that black is white when Party discipline demands this. But it means also the ability to believe that black is white, and more, to know that black is white, and to forget that one has ever believed the contrary. This demands a continuous alteration of the past, made possible by the system of thought which really embraces all the rest, and which is known in Newspeak as doublethink.

Orwell, 1984
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thegonagle Donating Member (548 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 03:30 PM
Response to Original message
29. OMG, that's an actual quote?
I'd laugh if it wasn't so fucking tragic.

There is so much ignorance. I wish it could reach critical mass and collapse into its own black hole.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #29
31. I'm afraid so--
hard to believe this would appear as a serious column in an American newspaper. How can anyone in their right mind say this:

"So now youre waiting for the good news, right? The good news is that the bad news relative to the reactors performance wasnt all that bad. Although the quake and the tsunami apparently took more than 25,000 lives and left hundreds of thousands homeless, the events at the nuclear plants have thus far killed no one and the human health effects are likely to be minor to nonexistent."

:wow:


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 05:13 PM
Response to Original message
32. Helen Caldicott on George Monbiot --Today's Sydney Morning Herald
Edited on Tue Apr-26-11 12:50 PM by marions ghost
Sydney Morning Herald
"Nuclear Apologists Play Shoot the Messenger on Radiation"
Helen Caldicott
April 26, 2011

"George Monbiot and others are distorting evidence of the dangers of exposure."
---Dr Helen Caldicott is the founding president of Physicians for Social Responsibility and the author of seven books, including Nuclear Power is Not the Answer.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/nucle...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 05:32 AM
Response to Reply #32
42. "Science" must be the stuff that confirms what big corporations like...
not what actual scientists determine using scientific method.

If you think otherwise, you must be a creationist!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #42
62. A 2010 Pro-Nuclear Report from MIT
written by scientists...was funded by the Electric Power Research Institute, Idaho National Laboratory, Nuclear Energy Institute, Areva, GE-Hitachi, Westinghouse, Energy Solutions, and Nuclear Assurance Corporation.

http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/the-end-of-... /

Nuclear Biz has their preferred scientists...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #62
64. Yes, the nuclear biz has its preferred scientists... and they are a clear minority of scientists.
That's two powerful indicators, isn't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #64
66. I hope you're right
but from what I've seen, the minority rules in this country.

From the 2010 MIT report:

---"LWRs (light water reactors) will be the primary reactor choice for many decades... they can be operated safely..."

---"fuel cycle decisions should be taken over the next decade or two in the context of a century time scale for managed storage."

---"Either distributed storage (at reactor), centralized long term storage, or storage in a repository are technically sound."

--------------

How do these scientific recommendations look today??? :banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 09:18 PM
Response to Original message
37. Clean energy does not mean nuclear
Nuclear = the dirtiest of them all...

Good night & good luck :hi:

mg
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Generic Other Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 09:45 PM
Response to Original message
38. sand in my eyes
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nolabels Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 06:37 AM
Response to Reply #38
45. Gravity proves up is down
but this can only be important if you are not sure whether you at the south pole or north pole
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Urban Prairie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 08:04 AM
Response to Original message
49. "The events at the nuclear plants have thus far killed no one"
Edited on Tue Apr-26-11 08:07 AM by Urban Prairie
"and the human health effects are likely to be minor to nonexistent."

WTF...the stricken reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi PLANT (not "plants") CONTINUE to emit radiation in the air and in the runoff waste-water that did not turn into steam. The four reactors are NOT under control, because if they WERE, they would no longer be emitting radiation, or would the temperatures inside the reactors' containment vessels and their spent fuel "pools" (those that are still relatively intact) be rising and falling. Just like the ecotastrophe in the GOM last spring and summer, just because the gusher was allegedly plugged, and the millions upon millions of barrels of crude oil/methane gas that was spewed out that was made to sink to the seafloor through the use of millions of gallons of TOXIC dispersants, doesn't mean that there will not be any lingering short and long-term effects to the marine life within the Gulf, as well as the short/long-term effects to the health of those living nearby or upon the Gulf Coast.

Any OBVIOUSLY premature pronouncements by any so-called "experts" that there likely will be little to no harm to the local, regional, or global environment or ecology, as well as to plants and animals, including humans, as a result of this ONGOING nuclear castastrophe may be/are being bribed, threatened or "pursuaded" by their governments to do so, they do not have "tea leaves or crystal balls", to use to foretell the near or far future, and they simply cannot be trusted or believed, IMO.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 09:05 AM
Response to Original message
51. thanx for the recs
this thread has been unrecced so much I KNOW it's attracted many of the Ostrich Clan...as expected.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 09:16 AM
Response to Original message
52. I think both Clint Wolfe and George Monbiot need to go work at the Fukushima plant for a while.
And see for themselves how "safe" it really is. I hear that they are paying very well, as long as you don't mind the shorter lifespan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #52
59. right
let's see the two of them in their white plastic jumpsuits and hard hats--standing in some of that warm foamy water around there--telling us to "come on down" to the beaches of Fukushima.

Yeah. Sure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kablooie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 09:57 AM
Response to Original message
53. You shoot someone in the stomach. He writhes on the ground. "See it's safe! He didn't even die!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 10:19 AM
Response to Original message
54. If you shoot someone with a gun, 0.00001 seconds after shooting, no one is dead.
I know it's stupid to say that, but it's almost as ignorant as the quoted statement in that article.

Time has shown that 1.4 million people have died from the Chernobyl disaster.

Time is what will give radioactive isotopes their travel distance. Who knows, maybe the author of the quote will ingest some radioactive particle from the very nuclear accident which he claims was so safe.

This bothers me so much since I have an engineering "friend" who I went to school with, who has since turned a 180, and is now a smug conservative. And I await his highly intelligent brain's convoluted comment on this incident. It's amazing how intelligence has nothing to do with what people know, and more with how they view things. I can't really put it into words. Brilliant people, yet stupid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 11:13 AM
Response to Reply #54
58. good analogy
This whole "no one is dead" argument is not only ignorant, it's so insulting to the people who have been severely affected, the "walking dead" especially. And this is WHILE the plant is still spewing and the effects cannot be quantified...

Brilliant people, yet stupid. They are everywhere. These are people who easily compartmentalize. They rationalize all fears away. They have learned how not to feel anything but their own concerns. It's hard to reconcile high intelligence with such an apparent callousness towards other human beings. They have no real wisdom, no matter how old they are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yo_Mama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 10:22 AM
Response to Original message
55. Just as your death certificate proves you are still living? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
upi402 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 12:11 PM
Response to Original message
60. Thom Hatrmann had a geiger counter in Europe and found food in stores
Edited on Tue Apr-26-11 12:11 PM by upi402
was radioactive - shortly after Cernobyl.

But he's smarter and better prepared than me. Nuclear is insane. Anyone still touting it is discredited now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #60
61. I hope you're right
that pro-nuke is no longer a rational position. If it's the only thing we can ever do to make sense of the Fukushima disaster, then we can at least get nuclear sanity out of it. Future generations will see it as a big turning point. (As they store and monitor our nuclear waste... and eat it too)

A lot of money has been invested in the "Nuclear Renaissance." There will always be diehards pushing for it. But guess what folks, Nuclear gets a big "F" and that stands for Fukushima. So can we move on now? Finally?

Smart investors will see the writing on the wall and put their money elsewhere.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
upi402 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #61
65. F words flood my head! Fukushinam, Fail, Fools,
and many of us really feel like saying the other one too!
:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 04:59 PM
Response to Reply #65
68. Fukushima scream
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

All the F words in the words can't contain the horror....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #61
69. Smart investors have
after Chernobyl Wall Street said no to nukes, and has not said yes since. It is uninsurable.

Not that this little factoid is spoken off regularly by the pro industry shills
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 07:04 PM
Response to Reply #69
70. I would think so
how can compensation be calculated even?

Wall Street said no to nukes, so how did 20+ of them get on the boards for this country?

Kinda like cigarettes, they more they ban them here, the more they sell them to Asia where things are more lax.

Now France, they just made a bad investment. Huge mistake. Like Japan, just a huge mistake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 07:47 PM
Response to Reply #70
72. It's called the Price Anderson Act
and if it were repealed it will be a horse race to decom them
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 08:07 PM
Response to Reply #72
74. thanks, OK I see
I looked it up--Price Anderson has been in place since 1957!

"The Price-Anderson Act has been criticized by various think tanks and environmental organizations, including Union of Concerned Scientists, Greenpeace International, Public Citizen and the Cato Institute. Public Citizen has been particularly critical of Price-Anderson; it claims that the Act understates the risks inherent in atomic power, does not require reactors to carry adequate insurance, and would therefore result in taxpayers footing most of the bill for a catastrophic accident.(snip)

The free government-granted insurance given to for-profit nuclear plant operators in the Price-Anderson Act has been used as an example of corporate welfare by Ralph Nader.

Price-Anderson has been criticized by many of these groups due to a portion of the Act that indemnifies Department of Energy and private contractors from nuclear incidents even in cases of gross negligence and willful misconduct (although criminal penalties would still apply). "No other government agency provides this level of taxpayer indemnification to non-government personnel".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price%E2%80%93Anderson_Nuc...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Keith Bee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 02:26 PM
Response to Original message
63. NUCLEAR! POWER! IS SAFE!
ALL WILL BE ASSIMILATED! RESISTENCE IS FUTILE!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TK421 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 07:55 PM
Response to Reply #63
73. DUCK AND COVER!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 08:41 PM
Response to Reply #73
75. what?! th....
:wtf:

When the 'bomb" hits, and it can come at any time--jump under the nearest tablecloth? "You might get a bad sunburn." :eyes:

I like the comment where somebody said, 'Duck and Cover'-- I've got my duck tape and plastic...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TK421 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 08:47 PM
Response to Reply #75
76. There was a South Park episode that took a crap on that video
except in the South Park episode, they were dealing with a volcano :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 09:54 PM
Response to Reply #76
78. sorry I missed that one...
hope they included Bert the Turtle...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Sep 20th 2014, 09:54 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC