EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- As Death Toll Rises Beyond 500, Garment Factory Disaster 'Worst in World History'
- Climate Change's 'Evil Twin': Ocean Acidification
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Disaster Capitalism Strikes as Hedge Funds Circle Near-Bankrupt Municipalities Like Vultures
- Move Over, Koch Brothers: A Bigger, Darker Rightwing Funder Is Out to Destroy Public Education
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- Climate Change's 'Evil Twin': Ocean Acidification
- Survival of the ... Nicest?
Popular content
Today's Top News
We May Yet Lose Tokyo… Not to Mention Alaska… and Now Georgia, Too
As the Nuclear Regulatory Commission approves a construction/operating license for two new reactors in Georgia, alarming reports from Japan indicate the Fukushima catastrophe is far from over.
Reactor pushers have welcomed the NRC's approval of the new Westinghouse AP-1000 design for Georgia's Vogtle. Two reactors operate there now, and the two newly approved ones are being funded with $8.3 billion in federally guaranteed loans and state-based rate hikes levied in advance of the reactors' being completed. (Photo: Georgia Power Co.)
Thousands of tons of intensely radioactive spent fuel are still in serious jeopardy. Radioactive trash and water are spewing into the environment. And nuclear engineer Arnie Gundersen reports that during the string of disasters following March 11, 2011's earthquake and tsunami, Fukushima 1's containment cap may actually have lifted off its base, releasing dangerously radioactive gasses and opening a gap for an ensuing hydrogen explosion.
There are some two dozen of these Mark I-style containments currently in place in the US.
Newly released secret email from the NRC also shows its Commissioners were in the dark about much of what was happening during the early hours of the Fukushima disaster. They worried that Tokyo might have to be evacuated, and that airborne radiation spewing across the Pacific could seriously contaminate Alaska.
Reactor pushers have welcomed the NRC's approval of the new Westinghouse AP-1000 design for Georgia's Vogtle. Two reactors operate there now, and the two newly approved ones are being funded with $8.3 billion in federally guaranteed loans and state-based rate hikes levied in advance of the reactors' being completed.
NRC Chair Gregory Jazcko made the sole no vote on the Vogtle license, warning that the proposed time frame would not allow lessons from Fukushima to be incorporated into the reactors' design.
The four Commissioners voting to approve have attacked Jaszco in front of Congress for his "management style," but this vote indicates the problem is certainly more rooted in attitudes toward reactor safety.
The approval is the first for a new construction project since 1978. The debate leading up to it stretched out for years. Among other things, the Commission raised questions about whether the AP1000 can withstand earthquakes and other natural disasters. Even now the final plans are not entirely complete. Only two other US reactors---in neighboring South Carolina---are even in the pre-construction phase. As in Georgia, South Carolina consumers are being forced to pay for the reactors as they are being built. Should they not be completed, or suffer disaster once they are, the state's ratepayers will be on the hook.
The industry is heralding the Vogtle approval as a major boon to the "Nuclear Renaissance." But it comes alongside the announcement that all 17 reactors owned by the Tokyo Electric Company are shut, as are all but two of Japan's 50-plus nukes.
Germany has decided to shut all its nukes by 2022. New reactor financing in Great Britain is under legal attack, as it is in Florida. India has announced that in 2011 it led the world in new green energy projects. China has yet to make its future nuclear commitments clear in the wake of the Fukushima disaster. And no American utility is readily available to follow in Vogtle's path, with operating reactors in Vermont and New York's Indian Point under fierce governmental attack. Florida's Crystal River is beset by huge bills for faulty repair work, and may be headed for permanent shutdown. Both currently licensed reactors at California's San Onofre are closed following radioactive leaks, and a disturbing pattern of tube holes in newly installed steam generators has surfaced at a number of reactors across the US.
But the biggest shock waves this week were caused by Tama University Professor Hiroshi Tasaka, a key advisor to Prime Minister Naoto Kan during the Fukushima disaster.
Warning that Fukushima is "far from over," Tasaka said official assurances of the complex's alleged safety were based on "groundless optimism." Tasaka cited more than 1500 fuel rods dangerously exposed to the open atmosphere at Unit Four alone. The waste problem has gone nationwide, he said in a newly published book, as "the storage capacities of the spent fuel pools at the nation's nuclear power plants are reaching their limits,"
Tasaka's statements came as a new temperature spike unexpectedly stuck Fukushina Unit Two. For reasons not yet clear, heat releases in excess of 158 degrees Farenheit spewed from the core, prompting Tokyo Electric to pump in more water and boric acid meant to damp down an apparently on-going chain reaction. Prof. Tasaka and others warn that this in turn will contribute to spreading still more radiation into the water table and oceans.
With bitter debate raging in Japan, the US and elsewhere over the killing power of Fukushima's emissions, the certification of a new US reactor design may someday be remembered as a bizarre epitaph for the 20th century's most expensive failed technology.
Without state ratepayers and federal taxpayers being forced to foot the bill, new reactor construction in the US is going nowhere.
And without a final resolution to the on-going horrors at Fukushima, the entire planet, from Tokyo to Alaska to Georgia and beyond, remains at serious radioactive risk.
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...


158 Comments so far
Show AllHear! Hear! thank you for so concisely and truly articulating that part of our strategy, both Mairead and PSA.
You are quite welcome J4zonian- it is nice to make your acquaintance.
The Japanese should be very concerned about the Fukushima nuclear power plant isn’t over, far from it… Any one of the three melted down reactor cores can go critical at any time and blow the entire plant with all of those spent fuel rods sky high. It would be a lot more than just Tokyo they would lose.
And here in the US, it isn’t only Alaska. When the three reactors first melted down and deadly isotopes of iodine 131 and cesium were released, the Jet Stream had dipped down to the Mexico border area and then swung up across most of the US.
I’m personally far more concerned about the 15 old nuke reactors and their spent fuel rod ponds sitting along the New Madrid earthquake fault line in Mid America, one of the most dangerous fault lines in the world, than I am about the two new reactors in Georgia. Those two Westinghouse reactors are state of the art and nothing could ever go wrong… Could it? __ Sorry, R trying to be finny.
The only things I can imagine going wrong are an earthquake, a flood, a cat 3 to 6 tornado ripping through the plant. Or an act of sabotage, a failed valve, ruptured water pipe, a human error, a “unforeseen”, oh shitt event, little things like that.
The nuke industry and NRC always talk about how the reactors can withstand a magnitude 7 earthquake… What about an 8 or 9? And what magnitude will the spent fuel rod ponds withstand? A 4 maybe?
There is no such thing as a safe ticking time bomb, a loaded gun, or a nuclear power plant. Shitt happens and all too often with nuclear power and all other nuclear nightmares .
The EPA was measuring the amount of contamination in water from the Japan disaster. As the GOP is aching to eliminate the EPA who will monitor contamination for us when it is gone?
For the record it is the Obama Admin that is currently running the EPA - and it is the Obama admin that quit reporting the increased radiation levels in the USA from the Fukushima nuke meltdown.
This admin is No Lesser evil -
And oh yeah - they're 'safe'... safe in what kind of world?
Not the world we live in now - the FCUK US ISRAEL gang (France Canada United Kingdom US Israel) are going to preemptively blow up Iran's nuclear generators and infrastructure -- at which point, according to the rules of war (that's a good one, I know) Iran is within their rights to attack their attacker's nuclear reactors - and why wouldn't they?
Security in nuclear plants has been a joke as far as I know - at Fukushima, the Yakuza (japanese mafia) has been supplying 'cheap' labour (day labour they find on the streets) to TEPCO under the table -- the article is on counterPunch.org.
Post-Shah Iran has had decades to plan for this attack which they knew was coming - we may be in for few a very nasty surprises.
I can sum up the cost of Nuclear in One word; "Hanford". The Hanford Nuclear Facility, a story that just keeps on giving. Here's the latest update; http://www.tri-cityherald.com/2011/11/05/1707216/115b-not-enough-to-finish-work.html#storylink=mirelated .
After putting in hundreds of billions of dollars already, $115 billion more is not going to be enough. Unlike anything else in the world including nations, once the story of a Nuclear Reactor is started, it never ends, ever. The only ending to this story is the cost of lining the entire Columbia River? Or losing all the crops currently being irrigated with water from the Columbia? Then there's the dams, salmon & the recreation? Not to mention the fresh drinking water? This is what they mean by a "glowing" future?
Building a huge nuclear complex and nuclear waste dump in the floodplain of the Columbia River was a horrid military decision. The military might have pled ignorance prior to the use of the atomic bombs. Not closing the thing down for another 60 years running is a horrid civilian decision.
For the government's information, river flooding is rumored to be relatively uncontrollable.
For the record:
Top ownership of Southern Company - the owner of these new nuke plants
Holder Shares % Out Value*
STATE STREET CORPORATION 41,818,949 4.85 1,771,868,869
VANGUARD GROUP, INC. (THE) 34,050,349 3.95 1,442,713,287
BlackRock Institutional Trust Company, 20,778,127 2.41 880,369,240
FRANKLIN RESOURCES, INC 14,943,861 1.73 633,171,390
Capital Research Global Investors 12,500,000 1.45 529,625,000
NORTHERN TRUST CORPORATION 10,207,797 1.18 432,504,358
Bank of New York Mellon Corporation 9,729,214 1.13 450,365,316
BlackRock Advisors, LLC 9,383,856 1.09 397,593,978
BlackRock Fund Advisors 7,648,490 0.89 324,066,521
Capital World Investors 7,300,000 0.85 309,301,000
The Blackrock CEO is Larry Fink - one of Obama's top donors and bundlers in 2008 - rumor has it this predator fink is set to become Treasury Sec if the Oilybomber wins reelection.
In reply to ~sheepherder~,,, some brief info on geothermal power plants.
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/geothermal/powerplants.html
The average life time of a geothermal plant was 30 years until recently, when new technology extends the life for an indefinite period of time.
Dry steam plants use hydrothermal fluids that are primarily steam. The steam goes directly to a turbine, which drives a generator that produces electricity. The steam eliminates the need to burn fossil fuels to run the turbine. (Also eliminating the need to transport and store fuels!) This is the oldest type of geothermal power plant. It was first used at Lardarello in Italy in 1904, and is still very effective. Steam technology is used today at The Geysers in northern California, the world's largest single source of geothermal power. These plants emit only excess steam and very minor amounts of gases.
Binary-Cycle Power Plants…….. Most geothermal areas contain moderate-temperature water (below 400°F). Energy is extracted from these fluids in binary-cycle power plants. Hot geothermal fluid and a secondary (hence, "binary") fluid with a much lower boiling point than water pass through a heat exchanger. Heat from the geothermal fluid causes the secondary fluid to flash to vapor, which then drives the turbines. Because this is a closed-loop system, virtually nothing is emitted to the atmosphere. Moderate-temperature water is by far the more common geothermal resource, and most geothermal power plants in the future will be binary-cycle plants.
Flash Steam Power Plants…….. Hydrothermal fluids above 360°F (182°C) can be used in flash plants to make electricity. Fluid is sprayed into a tank held at a much lower pressure than the fluid, causing some of the fluid to rapidly vaporize, or "flash." The vapor then drives a turbine, which drives a generator. If any liquid remains in the tank, it can be flashed again in a second tank to extract even more energy.
http://www.geo-energy.org/geo_basics_plant_cost.aspx
California Energy Commission (CEC) 2007 estimates place the levelized (2) generation costs for a 50 MW geothermal binary plant at $92 per megawatt hour (3) and for a 50 MW dual flash geothermal plant at $88 per megawatt hour, which over the lifetime of the plant can be competitive with a variety of technologies, including natural gas.
According to the CEC report, natural gas costs $101 per megawatt hour for a 500 MW combined cycle power plant and $586 per megawatt hour for a 100 MW simple cycle plant. On average the cost for new geothermal projects ranged from 6 tp 8 cents per kilowatt hour according to a 2006 report.
Cost to produce the power is less than 2 cents per KwH and sells for an average of 7 cents per KwH.
The volcanic areas where such geothermal steam generation can be done are minuscule. Its contribution to renewable energy is small and does not warrant much discussion.
Well PJD, it is very obvious that you didn't read the articles on geothermal I posted and there are many others available to read if you should ever decide to stop being obtuse and ignorant and study the issue.
You also flat out ignore what the scientists at MIT determied in their peer reviewed study, >> ("That there is enough READILY AVAILABLE geothermal, to supply ALL of our electrical needs for the next 50,000 years.")... I am certain you have not conducted any such study.
There are pros and cons for any such issue... The pros for geo-thermal far outweigh any cons...There are NO pros for nuclear... NONE!
Your OPINIONS on the subject are worthless PJD... You do not know what you are yakking about and that is clearly obvious... Nor does Matti, saying the grids are not figured, etc.. The power grids are already mostly in place for geo-thermal, solar, tidal or wind power.......Nuke on Pjd.
We MUST stop burning coal ASAP and to do that and still have our electrical energy needs can be down easily with geo-thermal, which is 24/7,,, 365 a year. Then get the nukers put down.
All of that could be done within a five year time period witha massive, comprehensive effort... If we don't do it, we WILL have runaway, (*irreversible*) global warming and then,,, we can turn out the lights.
All the fear mongering has utterly failed http://www.nei.org/newsandevents/newsreleases/eight-of-10-residents-near-us-nuclear-power-plants-favor-use-of-nuclear-energy/ :
"Eighty percent of residents living near nuclear energy facilities favor the use of nuclear energy as one way to provide electricity in the United States. Half of them “strongly favored” the use of nuclear energy, compared to 11 percent who were “strongly opposed.”
Americans believe that companies that operate nuclear energy facilities are taking appropriate safety measures and are prepared for the most severe events that could impact U.S. reactors. "
So, yes, the nuclear renaissance will continue.
Thank God the corporate mainstream media are either burying the truth about Fukushima, Chernobyl and 3 Mile or entirely downplaying and misrepresenting it...the job of the corporate press is to protect corporate profits.
This might explain why so many Americans are complacent and ignorant.
mcsandbag1: All the propaganda mongering has utterly failed.
The 'poll' you cite only covers those living near plants and was funded by the National Energy Institute, a group "described by Dr Helen Caldicott - a pediatrician and long-standing nuclear critic - as "the propaganda wing and trade group for the American nuclear industry [which] spends millions of dollars annually to engineer public opinion".[4]"
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=NEI
There is a more reliable poll, not paid for by an industry front group:
"An ABC and Washington Post poll in mid-April found an 11-percentage point increase in the number of Americans opposing the building of new nuclear plants.
That poll found that 64 percent of respondents now oppose new nuclear plant construction, while 33 percent support it.
In a similar poll in 2008, 53 percent of Americans opposed new nuclear plant construction."
http://timesfreepress.com/news/2011/jul/21/plants-vs-zombies/?print
The actual poll:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/postpoll_04172011.html
And now for something completely different:
"Santorum earned a B.A. with honors in political science from Pennsylvania State University in 1980" -- Wikipedia.
This would place ex-Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum a bit over 60 miles from the Three Mile Island meltdown in his Junior year.
"Santorum met his future wife, Karen Garver Santorum, while she was a law student and he was recruiting summer interns for the Kirkpatrick & Lockhart firm.[18] They have seven living children. In 2008 at the age of 48, Karen gave birth to her eighth child Isabella, who was diagnosed with Trisomy 18 Edwards syndrome, a serious genetic disorder, with only a 10% chance of survival past the first year of life.[160][161][162]"
"In 1996, the Santorums' son Gabriel was born prematurely and died two hours after birth."
- - -
First I'd say that human grief knows no political boundaries. Nor do radioactive isotopes in the air, in the milk, in the eggs or in the beef know boundaries.
There is no clear evidence that these two cases were caused by the meltdown, just as there's no evidence that cigarettes caused any one particular case of lung cancer. However, let this be a human face on the estimated 50,000 human casualties (a Mother Jones Magazine estimate) caused by the Three Mile Island meltdown.
Outwardly, the media implies that these types of things couldn't be helped. Inwardly, people wonder.
The problem with this speculation is that it attempts to isolate the un-isolatable.
Other pollution vectors could have been involved in the genetic eff-up here, even other radiation exposures, besides Three Mile Island.
And no outside agency at all needs to be a factor for birth defects, sometimes the problem is purely internal.
So why grab at smoke when there is a fire to be put out? ;)
Just an experiment.
We always say that we can't prove that Three Mile Island caused a particular stillbirth or birth defect. We never say that Three Mile Island definitely didn't cause the problem. It's smoke, but in a firetrap, smoke needs to be acknowledged.
Generally speaking, the reason we never say TMI (etc) definitely didn't cause something is that the reason is obvious if it definitely didn't. It's those who want to propagandise who try to inflate epidemiological guesses to the status of fact.
Here's a case where the cause of death was clear:
"The News-Gazette | Thursday, 30-Nov-2006 11:38 AM CST
URBANA -- Jennifer Stark wiped away tears and nodded that she understood the maximum sentence [$1000 fine and traffic school] a Champaign County judge gave her Wednesday for improper lane usage.
The [victim, a] 25-year-old former Champaign resident, a University of Illinois mechanical engineering graduate working for Caterpillar in Peoria, died on Sept. 8 from head injuries he received Sept. 2 when 19-year-old Jennifer Stark hit him with her car because she was downloading ring tones to her cell phone instead
of paying attention to driving.
Mr. Wilhelm [who was wearing a helmet] was bicycling north on Illinois 130 east of Urbana when he was struck from behind about 7:15 p.m. Stark was so far off the road that she hit Mr. Wilhelm from behind with the driver's side of her car."
(According to her MySpace page, she felt that the sentence was far too harsh. She'd had 3 tickets in the previous year: 1 for running a light, 2 for speeding. )
That's a very clear cause of death. No doubt there at all, which is also true in some 2 million other deaths related to fossil-fuel use every year.
There was another case, though I can't recall whether the victim died or survived in his maimed state (it was reported in the cycling forum around the same time, so ~6 years ago; I mightn't have the details quite right because I'm writing from memory). He was in his 50s or early 60s and cycling along a city street when he was hit by a woman so focused on getting to a mall parking lot that she was oblivious of her surroundings. She not only hit him, her car dismembered him, destroying one of his legs, savaging other parts of his body, and splitting his helmet like a melon. His body was catapulted some 20 or 30 feet. No doubt at all about the cause there, either.
Other people die of radon-induced cancers, but unless someone investigates, it's probably put down as a cancer of unknown origin.
Still others die of something random they did as a kid, that took 30 or 60 years to catch up with them.
I smoked from age 15 to when the Surgeon General's report came out. But maybe I didn't quit soon enough.
As an adult I used to use benzine every day as a rubber-cement solvent --I even washed my hands in it. Few people knew it was a carcinogen, so if I get cancer, perhaps that will have been the cause.
Before turning veg, I greatly enjoyed smoked fish, turkey, bacon, ham, and similar. Smoked anything is now known for having carcinogenic properties. So maybe that will get me.
What's pretty certain is that nobody will know for sure --I'll just die of an unknown-origin "cancer".
Of course, with luck maybe I won't get anything and will quietly evaporate in my sleep aged 130, getting my name in the record books. Like Yamaguchi Tsutomu san, who lived to age 93 despite having been in town for both the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atom bombings.
It's useless and self-destructive to worry about what we cannot control.
You can't control burning coal, or drivers on the road, or even control a firm grasp on reality. You are useless and self destructive, you should worry more- and take action to exert control again. I suggest you start with reality, Free Your Mind And Your Ass Will Follow.
When you have nothing to offer but insults, you should keep quiet.
You should take your own advice, if you think my statements are mere opinions then disregard them. But what I say is true, and for you the truth must hurt- but not as much as you are hurting the rest of us with lies. Just what actions have you recommended for stopping COAL? What is our strategy? How can I support you in shutting down COAL first? Where is your first street action taking place? You live in a triangle of COAL gen demons, name the one you have picketed recently? Or any coordinated action you have participated in? You are simple and plain.
You can bet that any of those reactors will not be built around any .001% communities. Which I don't really care because I rather think that very few of those .001%s ever consider what he half life's of some those nuclear products are.
One thing that opponents to nuclear power don't seem to be aware of is that both the reactor technology and the engineering analyses going into the plant design (seismic resistance, aircraft resistance, reliability and redundancy of the components) have improved enormously since the last plants were completed in the early 1980's. The Westinghouse AP1000 reactors to be used at this new Georgia plant are as different from the ca.1960's GE Mark I BWR reactors at Fukushima as a 1970's Boeing 747 is from a ca. 1920's Curtis Jenny
So, it might be reasonable to call for shutting down aging GE BWR's, but it is not reasonable to sweepingly oppose all nuclear - thereby assuring older unsafe designs will be continue to be operated, and with mindless opposition to any other nuclear technology, also assure we will continue to have a waste problem too.
OK, So what do you plan on doing with the spent fuel rods? I know, let's turn them into explosive ordinance rounds and use them to rain down nuclear terror on third world countries around the globe who don't subscribre to our way of thinking as to how they should be running their country! A good savy business/political decision if I ever heard one!
"mindless opposition"
It takes 20 to 30 generations for the chromosomal damage from low level irradiation to show in birth defects. The final chapter at Hiroshima hasn't been written yet.
But we are just full of "mindless opposition"...
"What we should know is that a millionth of a gram of plutonium, or less, can induce cancer, or will induce cancer. Each reactor has 250 kilos, or 500 pounds, of plutonium in it. You know, there’s enough plutonium in these reactors to kill everyone on earth... You don’t understand internal emitters. I was commissioned to write an article for the New England Journal of Medicine about the dangers of nuclear power. I spent a year researching it. You’ve bought the propaganda from the nuclear industry. They say it’s low-level radiation. That’s absolute rubbish. If you inhale a millionth of a gram of plutonium, the surrounding cells receive a very, very high dose. Most die within that area, because it’s an alpha emitter. The cells on the periphery remain viable. They mutate, and the regulatory genes are damaged. Years later, that person develops cancer. Now, that’s true for radioactive iodine, that goes to the thyroid; cesium-137, that goes to the brain and muscles; strontium-90 goes to bone, causing bone cancer and leukemia. It’s imperative...that you understand internal emitters and radiation, and it’s not low level to the cells that are exposed. Radiobiology is imperative to understand these days...As it leaks into the water over time, it will bioconcentrate in the food chains, in the breast milk, in the fetuses, that are thousands of times more radiosensitive than adults. One x-ray to the pregnant abdomen doubles the incidence of leukemia in the child. And over time, nuclear waste will induce epidemics of cancer, leukemia and genetic disease, and random compulsory genetic engineering. And we’re not the only species with genes, of course. It’s plants and animals. So, this is an absolute catastrophe, the likes of which the world has never seen before...you must listen to me. I’m a pediatrician. I’m a physician, highly trained. I was on the faculty at Harvard Medical School. My specialty is cystic fibrosis, the most common genetic disease of childhood. I actually — and I’m not boasting, but I’m a very good doctor; you know, I came second in my year of medicine. I don’t say things that are inaccurate. Otherwise, I would be de-registered. I mean, doctors can’t lie...there’s a huge literature on internal emitters and radiation. The New York Academy of Sciences, this report on Chernobyl is absolutely devastating. But there are now 2,600 genetic diseases described. I first learned about radiation by learning about the experiments with Drosophila fruit fly by Muller when I did first-year medicine in '56. You can produce a gene for a crooked wing that's passed on generation to generation. We will not live to see the abnormalities created by radiation from our activities now because, you know, we’ll all be dead by the time we have 20 or more generations. But it’s imperative that people understand that internal emitters cause cancer, but the incubation time for cancer is any time from two to 60 years."
Dr. Helen Caldicott 3-30-2011
Facts don't matter to nuke industry propagandists.
These nuke propagandists talk like every nuke problem is already solved.
Maybe it is on whatever planet these propagandists live on - but it isn't on Planet Earth -
It takes 20 to 30 generations for the chromosomal damage from low level irradiation to show in birth defects. The final chapter at Hiroshima hasn't been written yet.
----------------------
I'd urge you to think that through a bit more.
A human generation averages 20 years, so any damage won't show for *400 to 600 years*? How many genes do you think will be passed on from some ancestor for that length of time? Remember: the genetic contribution of a single person is already only 0.5 in their children. In the second generation it's 0.25, in the third 0.125, fourth 0.0625, fifth 0.03125, etc. Do you see where that's going?
By the 20th generation, the contribution of that original individual is already only about *0.000002* --one two-millionth-- of the total. Other influences of all kinds will totally mask any putative effect of that original "low-level irradiation".
Whoever produced that number is a fearmonger, the kind of irresponsibly self-important individual who drives witch-hunts.
No,
A witch hunt is against a person not a dangerous industrial facility. Movements to close dangerous industrial facilities are driven by victims living with the fallout who are not allowed to vote on whether or not they want to experiment with their family's gene pool like you apparently want to.
Deadly mutations have already shown up in the flora and fauna surrounding Fukashima in the form of deformed plants, earless rabbits, and two-headed fish. Lower levels of radiation are hitting the USA for most residents, and may, in the long term, affect fewer sequenses of ATCG, thus after long periods of recombination the gene flow and gene pool will experience deadly combinations not seen a natural mutation rate like we had prior to the 1940's.
So your rate of gene inheritence percentages don't mean anything since the mutations are not necessarily whole genes, but porttions of DNA code ripped appart by deadly Alpha particles, for example, creating new dysfunctional partial genes, or deadly damage to master genes.
Studies have shown that nuclear power plant workers exposed to continuous low-level radiation have high cancer and disease rates as compared with the general population.
Did you know that mutations occur all the time? Or that some of them are always going to be tragedies for the individuals who get them? That's how speciation works. We modern humans are the result of at least 4 million years of such continuous mutation, and it continues in us today with or without exposure to catastrophe.
The reason we don't all have some dreadful condition is the process of gene dilution that eventually produces the 0.000002 number: the survivable mutative changes in individuals disappear in most of their descendants quite quickly. That's why eugenics sounds good in principle but doesn't work in practice.
YOU ARE MONSTER!
Hey, did you know mutations happen all the time so let's throw our radioactive contamination into the mix!!! Next you'll be telling us this is good for us because it will speed up evolution!! MY GOD when you're in a hole STOP DIGGING!!
FACT: the nuclear industry LIED when they told us atomic energy would be the cheapest safest energy since we learned to walk upright!
Then the truth about the nuclear catastrophes and the true horrors of the atomic bombings began to leak out (pun intended) despite HEAVY censorship and suppression.
FACT: we are dumping BILLIONS of public dollars into nuclear reactors BECAUSE the OLIGARCHS can control our energy needs and BILL us for it that way!
BTW eugenics only sounds good to NAZIs. You are monstrous.
You are wrong, Mairead,
Mutations cannot be lumped all together as you are trying to do, so you can dismiss them as something natural that we cannot control.
There are two general types of mutations affecting all DNA: The primary cause of mutation before World-Wide Nuclear Fallout was Transcription error which is not caused by radiation, and DNA breaks caused very rarely by cosmic rays or low-level background radiation. We evolved with both and most of us can handle both. Most diversity and thus evolution is caused, not strictly by mutation as you assert, but by variations produced from DNA recombinations after fertilization. Very rarely a human alteration was created by mutation in the pre-nuke world and is either a benefit to the species or a handicap. 99 percent of all DNA mutations are handicaps or fatal.
All credible studies have shown that most living things suffer nasty radiation-produced mutations that handicap the individual life form and mutate his offspring's germ line far into the future when exposed to heavy fallout like Chernobyl or even "Hot Spots" in Europe or the USA.
After the bomb, and the much deadlier introduction of Nuke Power plants, we all are now at risk for horrible mutations that will in fact, damage us all, if more plant explosions happen to the 400 rickety nuke plants running out of control as I type this. They all were designed to run only 20 years. Now some of them are approaching twice that service life, since nobody wants new ones popping up in their back yards. The Fukushima plants were built in the sixties and were reported as unsafe years ago, unable to withstand tsunamis or earthquakes according to both the NRC and IAEA.
Your blind support of an industry you do not understand is most irresponsible "Mairead,"imho.
TJ
Mutations occur all the time, TJ. That's a non-controversial fact. The effect of radiation due to human-mediated nuclear activity is a drop in the causal bucket. I would be willing to bet a small amount of money that the effect of human-mediated chemical activity, e.g., fossil-fuel combustion, is much larger.
-------------------
All credible studies have shown that most living things suffer nasty radiation-produced mutations that handicap the individual life form and mutate his offspring's germ line far into the future when exposed to heavy fallout like Chernobyl or even "Hot Spots" in Europe or the USA
--------------------
Can you give us pointers to three such studies?
You provide no information to back up your lies, yet demand we offer 3 (3 !!!!!) studies to verify commonly known/accepted information? You are very skilled at soaking up peoples time and efforts, but what of you- List 1 ( or 3 if you can) thing you are recommending we do to join you in STOPPING COAL FIRST? You are not sincere, you are a liar, and an agitator. List one anti-coal action you have participated in? List one anti coal tactic you use? Name anything you are participating in that we could look to as to your real character and intent. Because what you present here so far is sinister and ugly.
So your argument is in 400 years when the deformities start popping up (an dthey will, in great numbers as more humans today ingest or inhale radioactive isotopes) you won't be here to worry about it so , why worry? And the deformities won't be so bad because they'll be watered down? By what ? A gene pool increasingly contaminated with radioactive particles? Take your issue up with the Harvard pediatrician Dr. Caldicott. And while you're at it, consult with the ongoing stigma some Hiroshima and Nagasaki residents face trying to find spouses. The explosion of genetic diseases, the explosion of cancers, OPEN your eyes why don't you. The level of background radiation has increased since the end of WW2. Unlike "dirty" fossil fuels, radioactive waste can be around for hundreds of thousands of years, lethal and NO ONE can claim to secure that stuff for that long. The more of it we make, the more contamination to our species we will see.
And, if nuclear opponents are indeed also opposed to coal power plants, then why is the absolutely no ongoing protest from them against coal power???
PJD, you say there are "absolutly no" ongoing comments about the dangers of coal. There were 17 posted comments, 17%, about how bad coal is and three that is is worse than nuclear before you wrote that comment.
So PJD, there are protests against burning coal on this thread, but the article is (primarily) about nuclear energy, not global warming or fossil fuels... You have seen many protests againt both coal and nucler during the past 8+ years here at CD. so don't be obtuse.... And dishonest. There were several posted protests about burning coal and you know it, you have been reading the comments and replies to your comments.
In addition PJD; geothermal is everyplace on the entire planet... Earth's upper crust foats on magna and they don't have to drill into the magna to reach the geothermal heat required for a geothermal power plant. And if you read the articles I posted you would find it does not even have to be hot enough to boil water.
Some places thermal is far easier to drill down to, especially in North and all along Mid America and along the coalstss. Some place it is a mile down, A few places it would be impreactical,, however; big oil or gas have no problem of drilling down miles to get the fossifl fuels, then frak the wells and that is alright... No,,, it is not alright.
Both coal and nuclear have their issues.
The CANDU design, from Canada, of all places, is much safer, and one generation of these would help get us through the coming transition to more distributed power sources.
New coal plants should be avoided by any means. At least oil and gas generation incur more of their costs directly on the user, not on the environment.
The problem is that whether coal, oil, gas, nuclear; or even solar biofuel, wind, hydro, all these industries will be run by similar individuals with a similar point of view; one which includes not even doubting the wisdom of cutting corners if you don't think you'll get caught. A previous poster said that nuclear power is all about externalizing costs; in fact, every profitable corporation is all about externalizing costs. After all, corporations were born as a response to the wealthy ceasing to invest in exploiting the resources of the New World after initial entrepreneurs were bankrupted by failure, unless they were assured that they could keep any profits but their liability in case of failure would be limited.
One reason may be that This article is about Nuclear power not coal.
Quit trying to change the subject and read the dang article.
You are a propagandist for the nuke power industry - hope you are being paid well for your outright bs and shilling.
Here's how it works in 21st Century Merka: Since Merkans demonstrated their willingness to accept a permanent tripling of their transport fuel costs over the past decade, the elites take that as an invitation to triple electric energy costs too. Merkans will pay triple in 2015 what they paid in 2005 for electric power. Why do Merkan elites inflate the costs of living for Merkans? Because they can get away with it. Also, Merkans are instructed to think they need perpetual ekonomic growath, so these kinds of inflation accomplish that. It's not only greed, but also diversionary agendas, red herrings, to keep the people off the scent of what they really need.
Nuke power is all about externalizing costs to future generations.
How insane is it to create electricity that is used up today but then you have to spend cash taking care of the nuke waste for generations.
Did we ask the future generations if they want to subsidize current power generation?
Hell no - cause they would of course say NO!
And regardless of what the propagandists say here - On Planet Earth we can't shoot the spent fuel rods into the center of the earth - or some other science fiction they pass off a current 'safety mechanisms'
So we create waste that we have to take care of for generations in order for current power.
Of course when the propagandists say nuke power is cheap they don't count those future costs - and they don't count Liability Insurance against future accidents of spent fuel rods in their cost calculations.
If they did there would be no question that nuke power is simply UNAFFORDABLE.
Hey Propagandists: Feel free to flag this post as you've done to multiple of my posts calling out your silliness and outright lies on this issue.
An interesting article
http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/02/09/big-winds-inconvenient-truth/
It's mostly handwaving, but there seems to be something substantive going on underneath it all, though what and how much are hard to discern.
Possibly they will build one in New Madrid, Missouri and the other in San Francisco, CA. Two nice quiet places especially suited for nuclear reactors.
As no fan of nukes I nevertheless find it hard to understand how people can be so singularly anti-nuke when fossil fuel remains the greatest looming source of major disaster for the whole planet. Sixth extinction event anyone? I say get rid of fossil fuel first and then dismantle the nukes as the alternatives come on line.
I am no fan of (X) but (reason to support X).
Shill training manual: Baby steps.
See next comment...
I lived in North Eastern Pennsylvania during the Three Mile Island nuclear crisis. Because of the weather conditions at the time, we were directly in line if a cloud of radioactive gas was released by a nuclear meltdown. Had recently seen "The China Syndrome" in the movies. We were scared! I remember plotting escape routes with my brothers if we had to suddenly flee. Now, all these decades later, it appears we have LEARNED NOTHING about the insane dangers of using nuclear fission to create electricity!!!
I later went to protests and signed petitions, but PG&E (politically powerful electric utility company) still built another nuclear plant in Berwick even closer to my home town of Wilkes Barre. Now I live in California, the weather doesn't suck and I happily deal with earthquakes. It beats glowing in the dark. But I feel bad for my friends and family still in PA or NY with the ticking time bombs that the aging nuclear plants represent. No one even knows how to store the worst nuclear waste which will be deadly for 20,000 years or so and is filling up all the on site storage containers.
Some genius in Japan decided to store the spent fuel rods UNDER THE REACTION CHAMBER in the Fukushima reactors that melted down after the earthquake and sunami knocked out the emergency generator cooling pumps WHICH WERE LOCATED BELOW THE WATER LINE!!!
Being a senior mechanical design engineer myself, I'm not inclined to denigrate my fellow nuclear engineers in Japan but I have to ask, with respect, WERE YOU GUYS OUT OF YOUR FUCKING MINDS when you designed these plants?? Or like most real life building situations, were you forced by budget considerations (a.k.a. Greedy Management Bastards) to go with these obviously inferior and guaranteed to fail designs?
And what are you going to do now that significant amounts of radiation is reaching the ground water tables in Japan and spilling uncontrollably into the oceans whose Japanese deep current transports the radiation to the west coast of the U.S.? I know I won't be eating any shell or deep sea fish for years in the future.
I could go on and on but what's the point? Powerful international corporations will just keep buying all the politicians they need to keep the short term nuclear profit madness on track. They even make the local tax payers pay the construction costs of the new plants that are approved. And of course, when disaster eventually strikes they will just declare bankruptcy and stick tax payers with the clean up bill. The poor people living around these plants don't really stand a chance in the long run.
At least the pragmatic Germans wised up and scheduled their nuclear power plants to be shut down and replaced by green energy. Now if the rest of the world could only follow their lead. But everyone with half a brain knows that has only a very small chance of happening. Maybe if downtown Manhattan is irradiated and most of the wall street masters of the universe are killed or badly inconvenienced we may start to address the nuclear power issue. But no matter what eventually happens, it's bound to include mass death, property destruction, and further poisoning of our earth. I hope I'm wrong but I wouldn't wager big on it. :/
OBAMA SIGNED THE NUCLEAR REACTOR LOAN GUARANTEES.
He is the President of MORE WAR, MORE PRIVATIZATION, MORE NUKES, and MORE CUTS TO THE NEW DEAL.