Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
- Scientists Confirm: Arctic Sea Ice 'Collapse' at Our Door
- Worse Than Obama's Kill List? American Support for It
- 'Let Us Not Be Deceived': Cornel West Names Obama as 'War Criminal'
- Genetically Engineered Meat, Coming Soon to a Supermarket Near You
- Nearly 50 Climate Activists Arrested Outside Obama's White House
- Quinoa: To Buy or Not to Buy... Is This the Right Question?
- Watch a City-Sized Glacier Collapse
- A Presidential Decision That Could Change the World: The Strategic Importance of Keystone XL
- 'Let Us Not Be Deceived': Cornel West Names Obama as 'War Criminal'
- DOJ Kill List Memo Forces Many Dems Out of the Closet as Overtly Unprincipled Hacks
Popular content
Today's Top News
2012 Is the Year to Finally Bury Nuke Power
The year 2012 has opened with news that Fukushima's radioactive cloud may already have killed some 14,000 Americans, according to a major study just published in the International Journal of Health Services.
Some 100 million tons of tsunami trash---much of it radiated by Fukushima fallout---has begun contaminating the beaches of our west coast.
Germany and Japan, the world's third and fourth largest economies, along with numerous others countries, have definitively turned away from the "Peaceful Atom."
"Fukushima," writes Wasserman, "has taught us that as long as reactors operate, the apocalyptic clock is ticking."
But it hasn't yet been buried. That's up to us. And 2012 is the year to do it.
We are already very close. The mythical "Nuclear Renaissance" has been gutted by Fukushima, low gas prices and the escalating Solartopian revolution in green energy. Solar panels, wind turbines, sustainable bio-fuels, geo-thermal, ocean thermal, increased efficiency and much more have simply priced atomic energy out of the market.
There is virtually no private money to build new reactors---except where there are huge government subsidies and guarantees. In 2012 we must make those all go away.
Likewise, there are increasingly powerful grassroots movements focused on shutting reactors that still operate. Germany has shut 7, and the rest will be gone by 2022, if not earlier. In Japan, just 11 of more than 50 reactors now operate. Because local governments can prevent reactors from re-opening once they go down for refueling, Japan could emerge from 2012 without a single nuke on line.
The biggest US battle is at Vermont Yankee. March 21 is D-Day for forcing a nuclear corporation to honor a solemn contract it signed with a sovereign state, agreeing to shut down if the state doesn't approve continued operations. The legislature wants the reactor shut, which Entergy now refuses to do.
But with some 430 reactors still operating worldwide, and with several score ostensibly on order, here are some of 2012's keys to finally ridding the planet of this radioactive curse:
- The switch to green power has become definitive and is clearly unstoppable. Last year renewables generated more US electricity than nukes. Far more private capital is now being invested in renewables than in nuclear or fossil fuels. General Electric says its photovoltaic solar cells will generate electricity cheaper than coal within five years. Well-funded opponents are making it more difficult to spread green technologies, but they can be beaten.
- The breakdowns in the solar business are far fewer and further between than in the fossil/nuke world. The lead in this technology has shifted to Asia. The much hyped Solyndra failure came not from technological issues, but because the Chinese are underselling its American competitors---and its own costs---by 30-40%. Returning at least some of the business to the US is essential to our economic survival.
- A dollar invested in increased efficiency---powered by accelerating breakthroughs such as LED lighting---has long since produced more jobs and saved more energy than one invested in nuclear power.
- In-depth studies from the Union of Concerned Scientists, Rocky Mountain Institute, and a host of others make it clear that investments in solar and wind energy yield better returns than nuclear.
- It takes at very least and optimistic five years to bring a nuclear plant on line assuming all permits are in order, but large-scale wind and solar facilities regularly come on line in half that or less.
- The decisions by Japan and Germany to abandon nuclear power have come from countries long at the core of the industry. Japan manufactures many key reactor components, and maintains ownership stakes in General Electric and Westinghouse, which have designed and/or built most of the world's commercial reactors. Germany's corporate giant Siemens, an industry mainstay, has abandoned the technology to focus on renewables. As other major countries and corporations follow suit, the nuke industry will waste away.
- Those who "support nuclear power" cannot guarantee the reactors they want built will be properly regulated or monitored. The world at large may not hear about the next Fukushimas until long after the radioactive fallout spreads around the planet. Given the dismal state of regulation even in "advanced" countries like Japan and the US, will those who support the "Renaissance" be there to monitor the Korean nukes sold to the United Arab Emirates et. al.?
- The US Department of Energy still has some $10 billion in designated loan guarantees for new reactors. Two reactors are technically under construction in South Carolina, and two more at Georgia's Vogtle. Despite $8.33 billion in loan guarantees, Georgia's rates are already soaring. Attempts to get Congress to kick in more money have been blocked by the grassroots No Nukes movement.
- Local resistance to reactor projects has raged wherever reactors operate or are proposed, and has been extremely effective. Richard Nixon promised 1000 US reactors by the year 2000, but the operable number was 104. Those nearly 900 reactors that went missing were mostly stopped by local grassroots movements. Every proposed or operating reactor not killed financially can be ultimately stopped by local opposition movements geared toward a long, hard struggle against "impossible" odds that ultimately prove beatable.
- As it has been from the start, nuclear power is a ward of the state. Nowhere on Earth are the builders held fully responsible for their mess. The Japanese government has just coughed up a tip-of-the-iceberg $13 billion bailout for Fukushima's owner, the Tokyo Electric Power Company. Hundreds of billions are yet to come. Either the company goes bankrupt, or the government takes it over beforehand. Either way, the public pays financially, and with its health and that of its children. So it will be everywhere nukes are built, including the US, where the 1957 Price-Anderson Act still limits owner liability in the wake of a catastrophe.
- Cost estimates for new reactors have already soared 200-300% and more over original prices just a few years ago, and will continue go ever higher. By contrast, renewable technology prices continue their rapid, steep decline.
- France's nuclear industry has all but given up on the US market. A reactor under construction in Finland is years behind schedule and billions of Euros over budget, as is another at Flamanville, in France itself. French public opinion has turned strongly toward renewables.
- US war hawks now want an attack on Iran for allegedly using commercial technology to build a Bomb. But it's instructive to remember that the west once tried to sell 36 reactors to the Shah, who was overthrown by religious fundamentalists in 1979, leading to the current crisis. Does the "Renaissance" blueprint mean pushing reactors everywhere, then launching preemptive wars following the inevitable regime changes?
- After more than 50 years, the radioactive waste problem has been nowhere solved. Nevada's Yucca Mountain is not revivable, and there are no usable high-level storage sites anywhere else on the planet.
- Nuclear power makes global warming worse. Greenhouse gases pour out of the mining, milling, enrichment and waste management process. Massive quantities of direct heat threaten our rivers, lakes and oceans. Thus more and more reactors must shut during hot summer months, when they are supposedly fighting global warming.
- The calculations on how much climate changing heat and steam have spewed into the atmosphere during the explosions at Chernobyl and Fukushima remain to be done. Likewise the heat impacts of the liquid emissions into the ocean at Fukushima remain unknown.
- By wasting huge amounts of social capital, nuclear construction slows the conversion to renewables, which are at the real core of defeating global warming.
- Fukushima is not over. Three melted cores remain problematic, and the entire complex is vulnerable to aftershocks which could bring spent fuel pools crashing to the ground and cause other disasters impossible to foresee.
- Nuclear power is killing people in ever-greater numbers. The industry continues to mount its usual personal assaults on those who prove that. But the killing power of radiation has been known since "mountain sickness"---lung cancer---began surfacing among Czech uranium miners in the 1500s. The continuum is unbroken through the introduction of x-rays, the work of the Curies, radium watch dial painting, definitive links to childhood leukemia, and more. The Hiroshima-based "science" used to establish a "safe" dose of radiation has been thoroughly debunked. The medical consensus that there is no such thing is quite firm.
- The nuclear industry never accepted the burden of proving this technology to be safe before being deployed amidst a civilian population. For a half-century reactor backers have done a superb job of simply refusing to maintain or study reliable epidemiological data bases around commercial reactors (as well as weapons production facilities). But as early as 1970 the chief medical officer of the Atomic Energy Commission, Dr. John Gofman, branded commercial atomic power as a form of "premeditated mass murder."
- The largest study so far of the health impacts of Chernobyl, conducted by three Russian scientists, indicates upwards of a million casualties over the past quarter-century. That first study of the US health impacts from Fukushima, indicates that many thousands more deaths are likely to be suffered in the US above what's already apparent.
Does all this add up to the end of nuke power?
Worldwide, the industry is crumbling. The collapse of its private investment base, and the shutdowns in Japan, Germany, Switzerland, Spain, Mexico, Israel and elsewhere are rapidly shrinking the technology's credible reach.
In the US, we can cut off all subsidies for new reactors, and shut down the old ones in Vermont, New York, Ohio and wherever else they sit. Fierce no nukes campaigns in the UK, India and even China, as massive demonstrations there are starting to erupt. None of these fights will be easy, but all are winnable, especially as the full impacts of Fukushima become known, and as the Solartopian green power revolution renders the nuclear option increasingly uneconomic.
The movement to shut the old reactors is hitting critical mass. The Vermont Yankee case will go to the US Supreme Court, which must decide if corporations are above even the contracts they sign with the public. Some two dozen Fukushima clones now operate in the US. They are old, rickety, cracked and dangerous. Other designs, like Ohio''s Davis-Besse, with a cracked containment and an infamous hole eaten through its head, aren't faring much better. Nebraska's Cooper has been flooded. Indian Point, New York, is also under attack from the state. Once the first of these are forced shut, the dam will break and the American fleet of 104 licensed reactors will rapidly shrink, along with others around the world.
Far more money is being invested in renewables worldwide than in nukes or even fossil fuels. Green energy will soon constitute the world's largest industry, financially and in terms of employment. The conversion to a post-fossil/nuclear Solartopian economy based entirely on renewables and efficiency will mark the most important industrial transition in human history.
Fukushima has taught us that as long as reactors operate, the apocalyptic clock is ticking.
With that in mind, and with the flow of green money turning into a financial tsunami, we can make 2012 the year nuke power finally dies.
It will require a serious push from the grassroots.
But we are ready to win a green-powered earth.
- Posted in
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...


118 Comments so far
Show AllDon't I have anything better to do? __ Nope RFinston,, besides what I do falls under the catagory of MY business.... If and when you reach my age, you might find that you may enjoy doing what I do.
However Finey; I see you already do enjoy doing what I do, except you are crazy to keep saying nuclear power is not a serious problem for us and it's not a health hazard,,, saying that inhaled radioactive isotopes of cesium, Pu, etc won't radiate internal body cells which can cause cancers to develop and so on... And you accuse me of being a broken record.... LOL.
If you weren't here with your sock shilling away with you lying bullshit, I would have probably only have posted one or maybe two comments.... So thank you rubbermouth, you gave me something to do. .
Thanks for the candid response, except for how you mis-characterized my purpose here.
It is a shame that you can't do something better with what years you have remaining, "Pops". I hope you will find something more meaningful for yourself.
Wow, good boy Finston,,,, right there at the computer, it only took you a very few minutes to reply... Of course you are on Pacific time and we're on Mountain.
Hey flapper-mouth Finney, you asked about what the new Prime Minister of Japan recently said.. Here is a Janurary 4, 2012 article for you to read and give you something to do.
http://news.yahoo.com/japan-pm-vows-bring-rebirth-fukushima-051854508.html
A paragraph from the article.. > (“When asked about how he might work to regain public confidence, Noda — who took office in September — said authorities have worked to release accurate information in timely fashion, but if that still needed improving, the government would work to correct that.”)..
Howz that blabber mouth? I very appropriately term you such RF, as you blabber away about me, but you don't know me at all... You have no clue whatsoever of my schedule... Well to relieve your ignorance, I'll tell you a litttle of it.
At 5:30am every day, my wife and I let the 12 ducks out of their coop, clean it and collect the eggs, release the dozen king pidgeons and collect any eggs, Then we fill the stock tank, which we have for the deer and birds on our 120 acres. Then we walk the property with our two Irish Terriers and smell the flowers, when in season of course,,, collect a basket of fallen walnuts and or mesquite beans, which we grind into flour twice a year,,, nd so on.
Two days a week, six months of the year I teach history at the local community college and in the spring we teach kids gardening and how to have a good mulch pile an how to grow and use green manure and other such fun things.. Ya got it Gabbleguts? __ Don't really care if you do or do not of course.
Thanks for sharing. It casts you in a different light. Why do you adopt the personna I have experienced all these months? It would seem we should be able to diasagree, but with civility.
Because I don't like you.
Is that dislike of me more because of my character or because of my statements about the biological effects of radioactivity/Fukushima accidents' health consequences?
Do you question your character? You know what you are inside better than anyone else... What do you display in charqacter?... How many here at CD do you think like you? .... Are you a dishonest, deceitful obtuse and an unfair person? ... Why do you suppose so many say you are those things? .... Everyone doesn't like everyone... I don't wish to like you or anyone like you... I don't adopt any persona.... I am me and we have many good friends whom we disagree with on some issues..... My wife of 56 years and I disagree on issues and we sleep in the same bed and we love each other....Why do you believe you are a fair debater?.... Go back nine months through the CD articles and read all of what has been said to you by so many others... See you at the next Fukushima thread,,, I'm sure..... Don't sling any insults at me and I won't sling any at you.
fair enough
Not an insult, an observation. bye
Shill , {slang}: a person who poses as a patron to lure others to participate in an auction or gambling.
Slang: popular words, phrases, or uses not acceptable in formal language
Insult: to treat with gross contempt or abuse
Observation: careful notice, scientific observation of facts
In my experience here at CD I believe that when one is described to be " very likely is,, any of several different shills working in shifts in an office", that it is intended as an insult, not an observation.
Shall we continue on a new track or slide back into the old?
I have the 2010 College Edition of Webster's New World Dictionary right here in my lap and it doesn't define the word "shill" as you have Mr. RFinston... Nothing at all about it being an insulting word, or gross contempt or abuse. It's a person who shills for gambling, etc, etc... "To entice others to join in".
I shill for people to understand that nuclear power is a horrible and deasly idea, because the isotopes of cesium 137 and Pu if inhaled can cause cacner. I'm a shill and proud of it,,, I don't deny what I do.
Btw Gabblerguts, the insults you started with me stop with the next article on Fukusima, not this one, unless you start it again... You have already insulted me here first so eat it.
Anyway Fineyboy, I "observe" you as shilling for the nuclear industry.... if you aren't paid to shill for them it doesn't matter, you are still shilling for the nuclear industry.
So that observation is not an "insult", nor meant to be,, nor would saying you are obtuse, unreasonable and a liar be insults, because you are... You have well proven that during the past nine months and here on this thread.
You should not take the truth as an insult sonny, it makes you look bad... You don't want that do you?
You stated very specifically that I was very likely in an office being paid to do what I do in commenting here at CD. That is a false and defammatory statement about me and for that reason I have flagged that comment.
WayneWR wrote:
'I shill for people to understand that nuclear power is a horrible and deasly idea, because the isotopes of cesium 137 and Pu if inhaled can cause cacner. I'm a shill and proud of it,,, I don't deny what I do.'
But even without nuclear power reactors, we all have some Pu-239 and Cs-137 in our bodies. But I think that we all owe RFinston a debt of gratitude. While others seem to try to determine who is a "shill" and who is a "troll" and giving inaccurate information, RFinston has been providing good info. Matter of fact, the "information" provided by you has been utterly and abjectively false. Please understand that you don't help your credibility by such actions. By the way, I too was raised in Philadelphia, albeit a bit before you were.
Grandpa
Thanks for the kind remark, John. It can be disconcerting when several people here throw those insulting names at you with such abandon.
I notice that the slanderous comment about me that WayneWR posted has just been removed by CD. I hope that the exchange of views in the future will be more courteous and enlightening as the result. If not, the comment policy does provide for the denial of access to commentors who abuse their invitation.
Let's see,,,, RF and Johnny say we are bombarded with 6,000 atoms of natural radioactive alpha "atoms" every second by cosmic rays from outer space and they don't cause an significant health problems like cancer, if any.
That would be 518,400,000 of those alpha atoms hitting us every day... Imagine that.
So,,, if a person inhaled 518,400,000 or a lesser amount of isotopes or "atoms" of cesium 137 or Pu, it would not harm them,, it would be the same or less that we receive from cosmic rays from outer space in a single day and in about 70 days the cesium or Pu isotopes, ("atoms"), would all have been expelled from the body... I finally got it.
And one very good thing is, ONE of those 518,400,000 or any lesser amount, of "isotopes" or "atoms" of cesium or Pu, would not radiate any internal body cells or blood cells and cause them to become cancerous... We just don't know exactly which ONE won't do that nasty stuff.
RF flagged one of my posts and it was deleted... Very appropriate on RFs part... That's fine, as long as Rf got the message, it wasn't meannt for anyone else anyway and I am glad it's gone... Same as on the doomsday clock thread. .
WayneWR wrote:
'Let's see,,,, RF and Johnny say we are bombarded with 6,000 atoms of natural radioactive alpha "atoms" every second by cosmic rays from outer space and they don't cause an significant health problems like cancer, if any.'
I never said that, and I doubt that RFinston did.
'That would be 518,400,000 of those alpha atoms hitting us every day... Imagine that.
No, we don't receive any alpha particles from outer space.
'So,,, if a person inhaled 518,400,000 or a lesser amount of isotopes or "atoms" of cesium 137 or Pu, it would not harm them,, it would be the same or less that we receive from cosmic rays from outer space in a single day and in about 70 days the cesium or Pu isotopes, ("atoms"), would all have been expelled from the body... I finally got it.'
There's a non-zero probability that even one atom of a radioactive isotope could initiate the cancer-inducing process. But please consider that you have about 250,000,000,000,000,000,000 atoms of radioactive potassium-40 in your body.
John
Oh scuse me ~John~... It must have been RF.. Anyway; RF wrote ,,, > ("Your attempted differentiation between natural and man-made radioactivity has absolutely no basis in theory or epidemiological research. No scientist has ever claimed or shown that a cell in the body can distinguish a photon, electron, alpha particle, etc. as coming from a natural or from a man-made source. The only relevant issue is how much of any such radiation is experienced by the cell.").
You are still saying there is absolutly no danger from cesiu 137 or Pu isotopes emitted from a nuclear reactor which are inhaled or injested by a person.... Okay.
And I wrote Alpha,, Oop, __ gamma,,,, beta
I wonder if a person should inhale 518,400,001 isotopes (*"atoms*) of cesium or Pu, if it would be any cause for concern? Maybe Johnny would know, because RF isn't really up that well on the issue... John is the really knowledgable medical expert on radiation stuff.
Well this old thread is long off of front page circulation so maybe we'll have to wait for another Fukushima article to find out....It is not very likely John will see my question here... It's just me, "Pops", the Raving Fool here all alone now... Fun,,,, and yeah, I'm bored. Got all of my chores done till 6pm.
We saw a mountain liom this morning, a big one, 6 footer plus it's tail, about 300 yards away. The terriers were as stiff as a dried up road kill... I alway carry a 12 gage pump with an 8 round loading tube and 00 buck and Ev has her 357 magnum so we weren't scared.. Beautiful animal, but ya never know, gotta be real careful when wild animals are around.... The Irish Terriers would stand their ground too, fearless dogs... We are much more conerned about killer bees so we always carry some bug bombs too... Not many birds or bees here anymore though,, it's pretty quiet,, like a lull beforethe storm.