Nuclear energy is the most expensive energy there is.
* We all pay for the insurance for nuclear power plants
* If there’s a problem, we all pay for it
* Each nuclear power plant uses up to 30 million gallons of water PER HOUR and we pay the bill
* Two studies show higher rates of leukemia in children living around nuclear power plants.
* Nuclear waste has to be stored for 24,000 years. We pay the bill to store it and so that’s 2400 generations of YOUR families paying for it
* Nuclear energy requires massively expensive agencies to oversee it.
* Nuclear energy releases dangerous radiation into the air and water during their “normal” operations. This radiation contaminates land and water for thousands of years. What is the cost of that?
* Nuclear meltdowns like Chernobyl and Fukushima and Three Mile Island caused millions of deaths and diseases.
Look at this collection of photos of children due to Chernobyl:
>> “USA Today: Radiation tripled in some albacore tuna off West Coast after Fukushima — Bioaccumulating in bones, not only flesh”
>> “PBS Reporter Miles O’Brien: “No one likes to see ocean filled with cesium and strontium and so forth” — It’s arriving on West Coast of U.S. as we speak — “Nobody likes the idea of eating cesium from Fukushima” — “Tainted water dumped into Pacific as we speak”
>> “Fish caught off coast of America and of course near Hawaii have had high level of cesium”
A lot more articles on fish with radiation in them at Enenews dot com
April 30, 2014 at 6:48pm
Cesium137 and Iodine131 also cause horrible cancers and other horrible things like thyroid cancer, bone cancer, liver cancer, etc.
That’s why nuclear energy is so dangerous to human DNA and LIFE.
April 30, 2014 at 6:29pm
>> Yes, radiation from Japan did make it to the United States.
Here is a video by Kyushu University showing Japan’s radioactive plume blanketing the United States:
>> The radiation was found in the AIR, MILK, WATER, RAIN in the U.S.
>> Soldiers on the USS Ronald Reagan are suffering horrible health effects which they believe is from their exposure to Fukushima radiation.
Here are some headlines:
“Wife of Navy Sailor: Our 1-year-old has brain cancer and spinal cancer resulting from Fukushima exposure — Wheelchair-bound Navy Sailor: It’s now affecting my arms and my hands, everything is still progressing”
“Navy Sailor: Crew members lost control of their bowels after Fukushima radiation exposure, as skin rashes developed; “It was a real big problem”
“Navy Times: Now 70+ men & women report suffering from Fukushima radiation — Testicle removal, optic nerve removal, leukemias, polyps… were in their early 20s with good health”
And many, many more articles on this at Enenews dot com
April 30, 2014 at 6:18pm
Don’t believe for a second that Fukushima hasn’t killed or harmed anyone:
“4% of 100,000 (4300) workers have reportedly died”
“64 members of the Self Defence Force and about 300 policemen have also died”
Of mostly heart attacks. One of the known after-effects of traumatic events is extraordinary stress, is it not?
"worker death from acute leukemia"
Ah, the exception that proves the rule. Odds of 1 in 100,000 is consistent with an exposure to 0.1 mSv, and he was exposed to 0.5 mSv.
“6 in 10 Fukushima children tested have diabetes — Head of Tokyo-area Medical Clinic: We are expecting diabetes in children from Fukushima radiation”
I don't know why they'd be "expecting" that; diabetes is not a known side effect of radioactive exposure (to which these kids have had little if any). It _is_ however, a known result of stress in populations.
“Fukushima radiation has already killed 14000 Americans”
Already slammed for terrible statistical analysis, even using the flawed LNT model. The most favorable way to put it is that they selected a window with a high mortality rate in the population (why not 15 weeks? why not 13? Because 14 looked best to their conclusion.), and attributed _all_ excess deaths during that time period to Fukushima, despite the fact that measurements of exposure rates in the US never floated above the natural variation you get from sunlight, cosmic rays, granite, radon, potassium-14 in food, and other natural sources.
It's not just wrong; it's agenda driven, dishonest pseudoscience.
Ran out of room.
April 30, 2014 at 6:12pm
Nuclear supporters like to say no one has died or gotten any health effects from Fukushima radiation.
"75 Japanese children with Thyroid Cancer"
The delta, year over year, is 16 suspected and 7 diagnosed, and include examination of 28,000 more individuals. Integrating these numbers with the baselines, they went from 26.1 to 29.5 suspected cases per 100,000 and 8.4 to 10.2 confirmed per 100,000.
This is in the weeds, just so you know.
"5 workers received fatal radiation doses"
"May have", it's an occupational risk, and I haven't seen any follow-ups.
You've got a lot of correlation without demonstrated causation going on here...
April 30, 2014 at 6:08pm
IMO, This article is pro-nuclear propaganda and it’s completely wrong.
Here are the facts:
(1) I’m a Reagan Republican and I’m smart enough to read medical studies and research and learn that nuclear energy is polluting, dangerous and unnecessary.
It’s not Lefty Greens who are against nuclear energy. There are plenty of Green Republicans out there.
(2) The article claims nuclear energy provides 19% of U.S. energy.
That’s WRONG. Nuclear energy only provides a little over 8% of U.S. energy.
(2) The U.S. uses TWICE as much Renewable Energy as nuclear energy and is so successful that nuclear plant owners are trying to stop the installation of Wind and Solar power because it’s eating into their profits.
(3) Every state could be powered ENTIRELY by Renewable Energy:
"It’s not Lefty Greens who are against nuclear energy. There are plenty of Green Republicans out there."
You've got an "apples and oranges" issue. You are right that it isn't a Left vs. Right sort of thing in the political sense. Paul Newman was a well-known "liberal", but he was pro-nuke. I don't dispute that there are those on the political "Right" who are anti-nuke (in fact, the requisite government control over nuclear power should be inherently disconcerting to conservatives). Note, however, that being anti-nuke is NOT synonymous with being "Green" -- quite the opposite as nuclear power is the cleanest, "greenest" power source (with the sole exception of hydro -- which should be utilized to the maximum level that society will permit). The right/left schism as regards nuclear power does exist -- but it is a "right side of the brain" (and the emotions of the anti-nukes) versus the "left side of the brain" (and the analysis of the pro-nukes).
Please, leave your emotions behind and revisit the matter.
April 30, 2014 at 5:49pm
As opposed to the Fukushima downplayers who lie about the dangers of nuclear radiation and are sure to make THEIR comments the first ones?
 April 23, 2014 at 1:22pm
Here is what they SHOULD BE PAYING ATTENTION to regarding the Ukraine–>
“Former US Official: War in Ukraine could cause disaster worse than Chernobyl and Fukushima — Situation “calls for far greater global concern” — Multiple scenarios result in meltdown — Foreign Minister: “Potential threat to many nuclear facilities”