EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Are We on the Brink of Burying Nuke Power Forever?
This may be the moment history has turned definitively against atomic energy.
To be sure: we are still required to fight hard to bury reactor loan guarantees in the United States. There are parallel struggles in China, Indian, England, France and South Korea.
The great fear is that until every single reactor on this planet is shut, none of us is really safe from another radioactive horror show.
Thus the moment is clearly marked at Fukushima by three reactors and a radioactive fuel pool still untamed after three months, with the horrific potential to do far more apocalyptic damage than we've seen even to date.
That image includes Japanese school children being issued Geiger counters to carry with them 24/7.
And Fukushima's radiation raining down on the United States, with links to reports of a heightened infant death rate in Seattle.
And by countless other on-going disasters and near-misses at reactors everywhere on the planet. Included is Fort Calhoun, in Nebraska, which got zero corporate media coverage as it was nearly flooded and did lose power to its radioactive fuel pool.
From well-reasoned fear, Japan, Germany, Switzerland, Italy, Israel and other critical players have announced they will build no more reactors. Some will start shutting the ones they have.
Japan and Germany are the third and fourth largest economies on Earth. Japan has long been at the core of the reactor industry. Germany's economy is the largest in Europe. Some European nations are rumbling about an alliance to shut the reactors among their nuclear neighbors.
All this could be happening merely in reaction to yet another Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. The corporate media has attempted to induce a coma over Fukushima by simply refusing the cover the on-going disaster.
But the worsening realities are as utterly relentless as they are terrifying. In the age of the internet, there is simply no way to totally suppress the horror of what is happening to our Earth, especially at its lethal, festering wound at Fukushima.
But what truly sets this moment apart is not just the radioactive nightmare. There have been others. There will certainly be more.
What's unique about now is the Solartopian flip side. It is the irrepressible fact that we have finally reached the green-powered tipping point.
For the first time in history, the financial, industrial and trade journals are filled with pithy, number-laden reports declaring the moment has come---and this can not be overemphasized---that solar power is definitively cheaper than nuclear.
It is an epic moment that future economic and technological historians will note as a true turning point.
In real terms, Solartopian technology----wind, solar, geothermal, ocean thermal, bio-fuels, wave, current, tidal, efficiency, conservation---has always been cheaper than nukes.
The “Peaceful Atom” has always been a creature of subsidies, a happy face painted on the Bomb. Its true health, safety and environmental costs can never be reliably calculated.
What, after all, will be the true price tag on Fukushima? How do we begin to calculate the costs in human agony and ecological destruction?
Already Japan is being torn apart by who will pay: the utility (it doesn't have enough assets), the government (it could go bankrupt) or the victims (who else?). The only thing certain is this once-powerful industrial nation will never recover.
It's no accident the reactor industry cannot get private capital for new reactor construction, or private liability insurance of real consequence, and cannot solve its waste problems without the federal government taking responsibility---which, in truth, even it cannot do.
The true installment cost of the US reactor fleet can't even be calculated, as much of the liability was dishonestly wiped off the books in the deregulation scam of 1999-2002.
What we're left with worldwide is 440 uninsured ticking time bombs, potential Chernobyls and Fukushimas, every one of them. There are 104 in the US. The only real question is when the next one will go off and how long it will take to actually hear about it.
Atomic energy also feeds global warming. Who will account for the enormous heat still rising from Fukushima? How much did Chernobyl spew? Carbon emissions come with the mining, milling, enrichment and ultimate disposal of radioactive fuel, not to mention the building and dismantling of the reactors themselves.
For yet another summer, nukes in France, Alabama and elsewhere must close because the infernal machines that “fight global warming” must shut shy of heating the rivers they use for cooling to 90 degrees Farenheit.
What's peaked now, as Fukushima melts and burns and dumps its radioactive poisons into the air and the oceans and the people of this planet, is one financial reality: even with all its subsidies, nuclear power can no longer stand in the market place.
The first option, of course, has become natural gas, whose price has plummeted. But the gas boom is based in large part on fracking, an unsustainable environmental disaster. Its momentum is huge, but so is its threat to the waters we need to survive.
In the long term, the future is with renewables. They are often subsidized as well. But the scale is not comparable, and does not fully compensate for the hidden realities of atomic power's uninsurability and its inability to solve its basic waste, health and eco-impacts.
Were the nuclear industry forced to fully insure itself, or were it charged the true cost of its invested capital, or what it does to the planet and the humans who live on it, not a single reactor owner could afford to keep a reactor running for a single day.
Small wonder Wall Street has long been more anti-nuclear than Main Street.
The numbers are now easy to find. WorldWatch has just issued the definitive End of Nuclear by Mycle Schneider, laden with charts, graphs, tables and all the financial data anyone needs to confirm the case. The Rocky Mountain Institute has long had similar material on file and at the tip of Amory Lovins's tongue.
Now we see Forbes, the Wall Street Journal and the core corporate press conceding the obvious.
In short, the bottom line has now become the bottom line. Reactor costs have doubled and tripled in the past few years even before Fukushima. Green energy costs continue to plummet.
The last barrier is that to understand how a Solartopian economy works, you have to be able to walk and chew gum at the same time.
Base-load power is readily available from geo-thermal, bio-fuels and a broad mix. One does need to balance the various intermittent sources---wind, solar, tidal---to keep the glass full.
But Fukushima has shown that nukes are also intermittent in the worst imaginable way.
Any sane for-profit player with the bucks enough to build a new reactor will now put them into renewables. Witness Google, now investing $280 million in a fund for installing solar panels on home rooftops, and millions more for undersea links to offshore wind farms.
The dream of a Solartopian future has become the capitalist present. Germany and Japan would not be committing to a green-powered future if its large corporations---Siemans, Enercon, Mitsubishi, Sharp---whose CEOs have run the numbers and decided nukes are a loser. And that the real profit center for the long-term energy biz is in green power.
What remains for us is to get the government out of the game. The $36 billion in loan guarantees Obama wants in the 2012 budget must come out. We need to call the White House and Congress constantly until this happens.
Then we need to find a way to get the Chinese, Indians, Koreans, Brits and French to join Germany, Japan and the rest of us in a post-nuclear world.
How soon this gets done is up to us. Our fervent hope---and greatest incentive---is knowing this must be done before the next Fukushima strikes.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...



71 Comments so far
Show AllIt's all so obvious now - is it?
I don't think so - too many people still asleep, or overtly hostile.
It was clear in the early seventies, with the 'Limits to Growth' reports painted for all the world to see in vivid colors - in '92 and the Earth Summit - in beyond a reasonable doubt science by James Hansen and myriad other climatologists - on and on ad infinitum.
The switch to 'Solartopia' is seen as a bonanza for the same interests that got us here - lust for power and privilege, greed, hierarchy and the abandonement of place and community.
I haven't seen anything yet to rejoice at, save a few lonely individuals doing what they can.
Manysummits
=====
Speaking of the early seventies, remember the zero population growth (ZPG)movement ?
By 1980 it was history.
Since then, Wall Street and the politicians they own have groomed the nuclear industry to the point that it is becoming another too big to fail industry that requires ever expanding taxpayer funded corporate welfare.
Although Wall Street may not be willing to fund nukes with their money, they love it when the nuke industry gets funded by you, me and the rest of the US taxpayers.
Lets name names here - the largest nuke power plant operator is Exelon - who employed Both david alexrod and rahm the devils spawn emanuel.
And the builders of these plants are by and large GE - who by the way are deep in the Oilybombers administration.
Who in their right mind can support either of the 2 parties ruled by sociopaths hiding behind the corporate model.
It is pretty interesting how MSNBC (a GE property) is so avid in defense of Obama, isn't it? Maybe the only reason Rachel Maddow has a job is to protect GE's nuclear interests. If Obama ditched nuclear Maddow and Ed Schultz would be out on their asses the next day.
It always seemed pretty odd that a conglomerate like GE would be hostile to Republicans, but really, perhaps all we're really witnessing is oil interests (Fox News/Republicans) battling nuke interests (MSNBC/Democrats).
The prolific Duggars have new spawn: http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/43422853/ns/today-parenting/
Breeding like cockroaches, and we celebrate it!
7,000,000,000 and counting...
I admire someone with sufficient optimism to look "a thousand years down the road."
I think we'll be very lucky to make it all the way till Mayan Calendar Death Day 12/21/12.
Solar power has always been cheaper than nuclear if all of the costs of nuclear were entered into the balance sheet. No subsidies, no insurance guarantees, no government-paid-for repositories. Just true costs.
You are right - solar power will make our armies obsolete.
The only reason we need the armies is to steal the oil that we need to power our armies...
Wadosy,
So, hydrogen isn't ready for prime time? I guess Boeing didn't get your memo about the second law of thermodynamics. This "silly corporation", lacking any scientific knowhow or common sense, took a 2.3 liter ford ICE engine and modified it to run on hydrogen for their phantom eye drone. Now why use hydrogen, you might ask? Because, according to Boeing, it can keep the drone aloft for FOUR DAYS!
They provide hydrogen from a fuel cell.
If we don't have access to that engine and fuel cell, it's undoubtedly because it's just not ready for prime time, RIGHT?
Here's some more "impractical" hydrogen production stuff for you to pretend isn't ready for prime time.
http://www.fuelcellmarkets.com/acta_hydrogen_electrolyers/forming_relationships/3,1,9763,18,28977.html
That is excellent information agelbert.. Thank you.
You are welcome. Check out the new Honeywell wind generator. They put the magnets on the periphery instead of in the center. They say it's more efficient and it's also much, much lighter. It looks like a shrouded fan with two winglets on the side.
http://www.windtronics.com/
...
but but, where does the energy come from?
Hydrogen/ fuel cells may eventually be ready for daytime soaps but meanwhile the energy it contains has to come from somewhere. Right now it's fossil fuels. Maybe it will be useful at some point as a form of energy storage (although i doubt it) but for now and the foreseeable future it is useless.
The energy sources that are ready and being used now, increasing at tremendous rates are efficiency, solar, wind, ocean thermal, small amounts of geothermal, wave, tidal, etc. Renewables. Life changes. biomimicry. ...(last time i looked wind was growing at 30%/year)
I favor all the renewables you mentioned as well. Fossil fuel and nuclear use must be made illegal for us to survive.
Honeywell has just come out with a wind generator that can efficiently produce electric power at only 0.5 mph.
We are seeing real progress in renewables.
I suggest you follow the link I posted to see how hydrogen can be generated ffrom water (no fossil fuels are involved).
I followed your link. It doesn't generate it from water; solar PV is used to separate H2O into H and O. In any case, hydrogen is irrelevant. It's not an energy source; it's an energy storage or transport mechanism like a battery. We don't need to argue the merits of NiMH vs Lithium batteries vs. hydrogen; we meed to switch energy SOURCES from fossil fuels and nuclear to renewables, right now.
I'm glad we're together on the renewables, but we need to not distract and confuse people into thinking this is easy, or solved because such technologies exist. Republicans like Bush the Lesser support H because it means they don't have to take fossil subidies away (in their world fossil fuels will be the source to generate hydrogen from water), support renewables, do anything real or face aroused citizens who want real things to happen. Let's not help them play that game.
Seven billion people cannot modernize according to business as usual principles.
When are we going to get down to brass tacks?
Manysummits
====
Here's your 'citizen':
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/16/vancouver-riot-photos_n_877936.html?ref=email_share
Sure ... but where?
The 104 number is how many active Nuke Plants there are.
But you have to also account for the storage of the spent highly radioactive fuel rods.
For ex just outside Portland the Trojan nuke Plant was shut down by voters after the truth came out that the plant was shoddily constructed in order to save money. Great - Trojan is closed BUT all the spent fuel rods are still onsite - if/when the west coast gets hit w/ a subduction zone earthquake it's likely a radiation leak will occur - and Portland is just 20 miles downwind.
How cheap will that power seem if Portland had to be evacuated?
I wonder if the gov would even evacuate Portland - or in the name of National Security - not release the info and deal w/ the fallout later?
When you limit liabilities faced by people hiding behind the corporate model But let them keep All the Profits you create a model designed to fail.
What you "are" shouts so loudly, you probably didn't have to announce it ;-)
The only thing that is obvious is that you are concerned ONLY with your own survival. Your alleged concern for anyone else is rhetorical and disingenuous.
Tikkum Olam, imbecile, is a SPIRITUAL mandate based on every person's obligation to contribute to the HEALING of this world. Due to your hatred of Jews, which you project into a constant critique of Israel's policies (and many of us are aware of the aggression at play, hardly different from what's going on in the USA, but you get past that conclusion by blaming what the US does exclusively ON Israel) you try to lump that very admirable ideal with garbage, dragging down a spiritual precept that would be alien to you whether you were a Jew, Catholic, Muslim, Hindu, atheist, pagan, or agnostic.
Someone ought to count how many posts you've POLLUTED the threads with, just today. Evidently you have no life but what you can conjure at a keyboard, thinking you actually have something of value to say. And then repeating it ad nauseum (with emphasis on the word NAUSEOUS).
Much more likely is that nuke power is on the brink of burying us forever.
If it doesn't, there are plenty of other bury-us-all circumstances accumulating rapidly.
Not to dampen Mr. Wasserstein's optimism, but according to the NYT yesterday, the TVA wants to restart a 50 year old nuke plant in Alabama.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/16/business/energy-environment/16nuclear.html?_r=1&hp
The best thing about nuke plants in the south is their frequent mega-tornados that can whip through cooling ponds and transport fuel rods in neighborhoods.
So Homer didn't drop that bit down his own shirt?
i saw that nytimes piece. it's a warning. i think we can stop that nuke if we jump on it now....
Tom...
OUCH!
from the article:
~ But the worsening realities are as utterly relentless as they are terrifying. In the age of the internet, there is simply no way to totally suppress the horror of what is happening to our Earth, especially at its lethal, festering wound at Fukushima. ~
Harvey, you correctly highlight the criticality of the internet, but from completely the wrong direction!
The internet is our best hope at this juncture in history, as what is needed, more than anything, is rapid, global communication to allow for immediate, unanimous consensus of the world's average citizenry to abandon the work-to-live model based on the theft and destruction of the land, the enslavement of the resident populations, and the selling of planet-derived property and product, that we might save what remains of our exponentially-dwindling viable living conditions before it is truly too late...
I suggest this happen on what I am calling Global Start Date: September 22, 2012...
it is time to 'man up' and take responsibility for one's self and surroundings alongside one's neighbors, without industry and chemical, without lawyer and cop, without farmer or doctor or preacher or plumber...without cars and MacDonald's and Coke and teevee...
babies are dying, and will continue to do so...what is more important than that?
American Idol?
a time of great trial and tribulation, barreling down upon us, even now, like the fabled Midnight Special...
coalfires raging, whistle screaming like a frantic, possessed banshee from Hell...
Damnit, Harvey!! What the hell is wrong with you? I know passions run high when it comes to anything nuclear, but you damned well know you're going to be scrutinized on every word you write, so WHY IN THE HELL would you claim that the Japanese government is issuing *GEIGER COUNTERS* to school children when in fact what they are issuing are dosimeters?
Are you TRYING to get labelled a hack? We can't save you from yourself, so you need to do a better job avoiding even the slightest hint of sensationalistic exaggeration when you write. Please? We need your voice, but we need to to be heard AND respected.
And don't tell me you used GEIGER COUNTER because you didn't think the public would understand what a dosimeter is: the article you linked does a perfectly fine job of defining it as a "radiation measuring device," which is all the layman needs to know to understand its function.
I like ya, Harv, and I truly appreciate what you're doing, but for the sake of us who are rooting for you--and who are much less likely to garner a wide audience--please be more careful in the future.
Geiger counters and radiation dosimeters both measure ionizing radiation. There's really no substantive difference between them for the purposes of this article and people are much more familiar with the term "Geiger counter". No one's going make a "gotcha" out of Wasserman's use of the term "Geiger counter".
There's a big, essential difference between them: a Geiger counter is a somewhat complicated instrument that measures momentary rate, not accumulation. A dosimeter is a piece of photo film in cardboard that measures accumulation, not rate.
This is not the first time Harvey has 'fortified' his essay with a little hysteria.
MLB: I've been posting the message that there are a "tribe" of loosely connected posters who take turns in efforts to damage the credibility of whomever it is that authors an article. It's interesting that the previous several posters have managed to work that SAME objective by appearing to CARE about how Mr. Wasserman presents his arguments and is thus perceived. The same net effect is generated, that of making him look like he doesn't know his stuff, is merely being emotional, and therefore his analyses cannot be trusted. Well, I will say something about the forum's imposters, they are like chameleons in their sinister capacity to adapt quickly. I will continue to monitor THEIR moves and the modus operandi, and publish my findings; as after all, that's part of what they're doing here to many of US!
Now it's time for Scribe to chastise me for relating this message. It's a very sensitive issue to him. Makes one wonder why... Interesting, too, that he happens to be one of the posters reinforcing a "damning with feint praise" approach to Mr. Wasserman. So now the conversation can derail to the difference between one tool of measurement and another, and away from the far more important issue of nuclear power itself.
PARANOID: At dinner two weeks ago I began to talk to another woman sitting on the deck, both of us facing the Gulf of Mexico, me being all too aware of the poisons brewing out there. She said she believed in End Times, however, she took the view that the concept of God creating the world in 7 days was symbolic... that the DAY meant a "day" in "God's Time." Her view of "End Times" ran along those lines in that she didn't see it happening all at once. I've found myself considering her view, as I learn about the awful fate of the grand forests today, the flooded Mississippi a week ago, the tornado outbreaks 2 weeks prior, the radiation streaming, the Gulf of Mexico a toxic waste dump, the trees of the Amazon either being cleared or drying up due to a lack of rainfall, and on and on and on. The only emotion appropriate to all of this information is GRIEF. We may be the last human generation... and for those who survive, deformities will probably become the norm. Biology itself will publish the cautionary tale that signifies what happens when human imperfection, fueled by hubris, takes apart what Mother Nature took eons to put (lovingly!) together.
And to think this is JUST the beginning. It's gonna be a really tough ride. And for those who apprised me of the likely challenges of growing seeds, I am aware. I ache for nature every day, the animals who went without rain for weeks here in Florida, the plants that cannot adapt to a sudden shift in the rhythms of the seaons, and still human beings go about and understand, NOT, for the most part, what they do.
Sometimes when I'm bikig I verbally send apologies to the local deer.
While I agree with your supposition that there exists a group within the CD commenter community that merely posts to detract from authors' credibility, I certainly hope that I'm not being labelled as one of them. My concern in posting that comment was and is that articles posted here on CD need to be of the best quality in terms of facts, in order that CD comes to reflect the very best of progressive online news sources.
This is a task we must share with the authors of articles posted here; while our primary function is to offer cogent discussion after-the-fact when an article piques interest, we must not shy from attempting a more proactive role in the hopes that authors might chance to read the comments we post.
I rather feel my comment could be considered a proactive attempt to dissuade genuine detractors from nit-picking; the difference between a spot-checking Geiger counter and a cumulative measurement from a dosimeter is indeed quite important--important enough that Mr. Wasserman probably should have even made mention of it--but to get that point "out there" in the comment logs quickly after the article is published was, to me, also important.
I mean, really, would we have wanted that tidbit taken up by Billy_y4 (was that his handle? It's been a while) or Mark Abrams? I merely supplemented Mr. Wasserman's article with a bit of fine-tuning. Granted, I was a little dismayed at having to do so, but here's to hoping he reads these comments and doesn't make that mistake again.
an interesting reaction. i think the use of the term dates me (65). if radiation measuring device is the preferred term, that's fine with me!
No, it doesn't date you. If it did, I (71) would be using the same term.
The real explanation hasn't anything to do with your age.
scribe,
This is the USA cesium 137 deposit map PRIOR to Fukushima. Remember that this stuff adds up. It just gets worse. What do you think the map looks like now?
http://www.ieer.org/offdocs/csdepglo.pdf
Good question. If past practices of governments here and abroad are any guide, not for a decade or more. And right now the AMA is probably busy telling their members to deep six any radiation sickness diagnosis.
Yes, I think the cover up will be that bad.
One wonders if the low birth rate in Russia is not due to lack of opportunities but was, in reality, due to people who were/are terrified of having children. The deformities were/are horrendous in people and animals. The documentary on the real deal at Chernobyl just came out in 2006. We are being lied to big time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiCXb1Nhd1o&feature=player_embedded
There are other videos on U-tube after that one with numerous victims of birth defects. It's criminal.
AGEL: Perhaps you should ask this Sage, who has all the time in the world on his hands, yet fancies himself such an intellectual expert (and merciless critic of others) just what his occupation is, that he apparently is not under employ, given the timing of the hours he posts here, as in ALL day. The unemployed expert, ready, willing and able to bash others... interesting resume there...
Fukushima may prove to be the fatal blow, but nuclear energy was already in decline before Fukushima:
- Worldwide, added energy production from renewables has outpaced nuclear for the last 15 years.
- Half of the increased energy production in 2008-2009 came from renewables.
- In 2010, worldwide installed capacity from wind turbines, biomass, waste-to-energy, and solar power surpassed nuclear capacity.
- In 2008, for the first time since the nuclear era began, no nuclear reactors were started.
- In 2009 and 2010, 7 new reactors were added and 11 were shut down.
- Only 41% of nuclear plants ordered in the US ended up being built and are still running.
- Not a single one of the nuclear plants now under construction was a fair market purchase. All were the decision of central planners.
- Since 2005, the nuclear power industry hasn't been able to raise a single penny of private capital.
- A 2007 earthquake cost TEPCO $20 billion. Fukushima could cost more than $100 billion. TEPCO is broke and has become a ward of the Japanese state.
- In the past 5 years, estimated capital costs for new reactors rose from three to eightfold.
- Since 2007, the cost of photovoltaics has dropped by 50% and wind power by 20%. Wind power is now 2-3 times cheaper than nuclear.
from
http://www.worldwatch.org/end-nuclear
http://www.worldwatch.org/system/files/pdf/WorldNuclearIndustryStatusReport2011_%20FINAL.pdf
mlb,
Quite right. In the previous year alone in Japan, more renewable energy sources came on line than fossil fuel. (no new nuclear came on line last year).
It's over for the nuclear Hindenburg death star.
Unlike Wadosy, the people of Japan know how to add and subtract.
Chances are that many of US have inhaled an atom of plutonium by now.
Of course. I know that smoking causes lung cancer but it is real interesting to see that the US Government didn't get behind an effort to warn its' citizens about lung cancer from smoking until this happened:
ACCIDENT: In 1964, a U.S. Navy Transit navigation satellite failed to reach orbit and disintegrated in the atmosphere. The satellite received its electrical power from a 4.5 pound, grapefruit-sized radiothermal generator that produced energy from the heat of its decaying radioisotopes. The device, known as a SNAP or System for Nuclear Auxiliary Power, disintegrated, scattering plutonium particles in the atmosphere over the southern hemisphere. According to a U.S. General Accounting Office report, the Transit 5-BN-3 RTG contained 2.2 pounds of plutonium fuel.
Since 1964, essentially all of the SNAP-9A release has been deposited on the Earth's surface.
If you want to know how many lung cancers 2.2 pounds of plutonium cause, just research it. Considering that one millionth of a gram of aspirated plutonium can cause lung cancer, you can safely assume that the answer would be "A LOT".
So, as you can see, that lung cancer epidemic all over the world was obviously caused by smoking cigarettes. Plutonium didn't increase the rate at all. Just ask any nuclear scientist.
Very interesting. Thanks for posting.
wow...my stepdad, a pack-a-day guy for years, died of lung cancer...right next to him in the same hospital room was a guy, also dying of a very similar lung cancer, who never smoked at all...
while I am aware that there have been a number of tests, and a number of leaks, I had not heard the tale you told here...
thank you...
Dubet and gardenernorcal,
You are welcome. Also remember that with each atmospheric nuclear blast, the worldwide distribution of Plutonium increased. This stuff has a half life of 24,500 years so we are basically stuck with it.
Do you have any documentation of that accident? I'm curious because I can't imagine how something like that could "disintegrate". The rocket itself, okay, but the power cell?
Usually something like a heavy, grapefruit-size ball wouldn't disintegrate, it'd drop like the artificial stone it is, and hit Earth virtually intact. It might break into pieces on impact, but they'd be big pieces. If it hit the water or soft earth, it would simply bury itself.
The idea that such a thing could somehow disintegrate in the air into pieces fine enough to spread themselves all over just doesn't sound plausible, so I'd be interested to see any good documentation you know of. (I've already seen http://www.viewzone.com/cassini.html, but it's difficult for me to take seriously a site that cites Nostradamus)
Mairead,
Here it is. It's really ugly. You'll see a breakdown of particle contamination (the scientists must have been sweating this a lot for such a thorough investigation). Initially, 75% spread over the southern hemisphere and 25% over the northern hemisphere. The reason the disintegration was reduced to such minute particles was the fact that it was very high when it failed orbital insertion and was moving very fast. The rest is physics.
---------------------------------------------------------
Science. 1967 Nov 10;158(3802):769-71.
Atmospheric burnup of a plutonium-238 generator.
Krey PW.
Abstract
The stratospheric inventory of the plutonium-238 resulting from the disintegration of a nuclear auxiliary power generator (SNAP-9A) in early 1966 accounts for essentially all the plutonium present in the original generator that reentered the atmosphere. Consequently, the pyrophoric (238)Pu must have completely burned up during reentry and ablated into small particles. The arithmetic mean of the distribution of the (238)Pu particle size was estimated to be 10 millimicrons, which confirms this conclusion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And here is the fallout distribution of plutonium soil sample collected 1970-71:
http://www.davistownmuseum.org/cbm/RadxPlutonium.html
Note: The above documentation (abstract) mentions 1966. I believe the correct year is 1964. The document I linked, however, is quite precise.
Thanks very much, I'll read up on it.
"The true installment cost of the US reactor fleet can't even be calculated, as much of the liability was dishonestly wiped off the books in the deregulation scam of 1999-2002."
I have to make a comment based on the above paragraph. You said there are 104 units generating power in the US, but there are many, many more than that. The word that triggered this comment in your paragraph is the word "fleet". I haven't googled it yet but there are hundreds of Navy vessels alone that are atomic powered. All the Trident subs and most of the Aircraft carriers are now nuclear-generated. I'm sure there are more than that but we have to be mindful of these in the cleanup as well.
right you are. the correct term is "commercial power reactors."