|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
How
Many Meltdowns Are Too Many?
I oppose Nuclear Power because of dangers associated with various elements of the process involved in the fuel cycle and dangers related to long-term storage of highly Radioactive Nuclear Waste as well as the possibly catastrophic results of a core meltdown as the result of incopentent management. You will see many examples of such mismanagement here and at the links you will find here. On this subject I totally support President Bush when he says "We should err on the side of life." There is a clear need to decrease the amount of carbon dioxide being released into the air but replacing that pollutant with a radioactive one is not the answer. While the US has 5 percent of the world’s population, it accounts for approximately 25 percent of worldwide energy consumption (Click Here For Verification) and is the largest contributor co2, accounting for nearly one quarter of global emissions. (Click Here For Verification) In 2001, the Bush administration withdrew the U.S. signature from the Kyoto Protocol, claiming that the treaty was "fatally flawed".(Click Here For Verification) The Bush administration announced on November 22 that it is rolling back protections to limit air pollution from factories, refineries and power plants. (Click Here For Verification) U.S. automakers refuse to dump profitable sport utility vehicles, retool their assembly lines and start building more fuel-efficient cars.(Click Here For Verification) This in spite of the fact that transportation in the US accounts for one third of the countries co2 emissions.(Click Here For Verification). These hardly seem like approaches to decrease co2 emissions, but the issue of this here is power Nuclear Reactors so if you want my reccommnedations for decreasing co2 emissions Click Here. When I first started looking at this subject I anticipated a little research but in no way realized the depth and complexity of this issue and the depth of the danger of Nuclear Reactors. Because there are a number of issues to deal will I will make a number of organized posts on this subject breaking the issue down into the following areas. 1. Past meltdowns, Power Nuclear Reactor deaths, mishaps, safety procedure breeches, venting of radioactive gases and the dumping of radioactive water.2. The many elements of pollution created in the fuel chain from mining of uranium to the consumption of the radioactive fuel. 3. Enrichment of Uranium 4. Pollution and potential catastrophe of the present method of Radioactive Waste and radioactively contaminated materials storage. 5. The danger of Terrorism in relation to all aspects of the Nuclear Energy Business. 6. An analysis of electrical production cost by nuclear reactor including uranium mining clean up costs, uranium enrichment costs, plant and nuclear reactor construction, spent fuel and contaminated materials packing, shipping and storage, decommissioning and demolition, plant site clean up, packing of radioactive elements, transportation and storage. 7. Health issues related to radioactive elements produced by power Nuclear Reactors. First I would like to get some terminology clarified. No mater what the fuel source, if electricity is the product produced we are discussing a power plant. My issue is with the fuel source and the construction of Nuclear Reactors, which is the basis for Power Nuclear Reactors. So I will from this point make reference to power Nuclear Reactors when referring to Nuclear Power plants. There are presently 103 power nuclear reactors operating in the US and 37 nonpower nuclear reactors. (Click Here For verification) At this site you will find a map showing the potential radioactive iodine fallout area as a result of a nuclear reactor meltdown similar to the Chernobyl meltdown for power plants in the United States. The first issues I would like to address are the past meltdowns, mishaps, safety procedure breeches, venting of radioactive gases and the dumping of radioactive water as well as power corporation and government coverups. While the meltdown at Chernobyl happend outside the US it did have an effect on the US through the distribution of Iodine-131. (Check Out This Map). I have drawn together a list of such incidences solely for the United States and have excluded the details of meltdowns, mishaps, safety procedure breeches, venting of radioactive gases, the dumping of radioactive water and coverups in other parts of the world including Canada and Mexico. It should be noted that the NCR is not set up to openly share all its documents with the public, especially those of a more serious nature. I will contine to expand the information found at the links below. Accidents, Mishaps, Vents, Spills, Dumps Fines & Cover Ups Human Radioactive Contamination Certainly the most publisized and scrutinized power Nuclear Reactor in the United States is the melted one at Three Mile Island. The event itself and the actions of the power company and government both before and after the meltdown must bring into question the safety of this form of power generation. On May 22 1979, former control room operator Harold W. Hartman, Jr. tells the NRC investigators that Metropolitan Edison- General Public Utilities had been falsifying primary-coolant, leak rate data for months prior to the accident. At least two members of management were aware of the practice. NRC investigators do not follow-up or report the allegations to the commission. On February 29, 1984, a plea bargain between the Department of Justice and Met Ed settled the Unit 2 leak rate falsification case. Met Ed pleaded guilty to one count, and no contest to six counts of an 11-count indictment. (Click Here For verification) Water Problems At Three Mile Island Another site concerning the Three Mile Island Meltdown The level of legal responsibility when breeches of regulations result publicaly damaging outcomes is a primary reason corporations that operate power Nuclear Reactors may fail to report accidental toxic releases of gases or contaminated water. Honesty in the face of disaster? |
Ten hours after the accident, Lieutenant Governor William Scranton was already telling a news conference that Met Ed "has given you and us conflicting information." By Saturday N.R.C. and state government people were openly advising reporters to ignore the utility; and the White House called the same day, instructing the company to refer all questions to the N.R.C. (Fabian says the company had already decided to stop commenting.) The strongest evidence that Met Ed had squandered its credibility is that reporters didn't object to the muzzling - on a story that had all too few sources already. Three Mile Island A Lesson Of History
The relative weight of incompetence and dishonesty in Met Ed's early statements is hard to determine even now. Journalists, in any case, focused on the cover-up. Thursday morning, in the first of several critical editorials, the Harrisburg Patriot wrote of "an attempt to avoid alarming the public by silence and secrecy, which is the best way to awaken the darkest fears of people." Roger Witherspoon of The Atlanta Constitution was less delicate. In a weekend press piece he wrote that Met Ed "basically said nothing, contributed little, misinformed N.R.C. officials, misled public officials, and finally shut down because no one believed them anyway." (Click Here For Verification) Statements by people exposed to Three Mile Island Meltdown: Jean Trimmer, Farming, Lisburn, PA, 54 years old. About an hour later, my skin, including the skin on my face and arms had become pink and very prickly. I excused myself from the people in the living room, went to the bathroom and scrubbed all the exposed areas with soap and warm water. Bill Peters, Owner of Auto Body Shop, New Cumberland, PA, 46 yrs. old. Friday, I was redder. Like you were laying in the sun the first time you go out in the beginning of the year, and you’d get red. That’s what it looked like. Friday morning we were joking. Nobody wanted to say anything. We were getting this hot feeling in the throat. And you were tasting, it tasted like you were burning a galvanized steel with a torch, you know, or welding it. This is the kind of taste you had in your mouth. This is exactly what it tastes like. It made you half sick. (Click Here For Verification) Mother Still Wants Day In Court For Son About six months after the accident, we noticed that our German shepherd had white patches on his eyes. ... But we never associated it with TMI. When we really noticed things was when my mother's cat delivered kittens, and all the kittens were deformed. (Click Here For Verification) More Three Mile Island Meltdown info. A Report On Potential Damages from a Major Release of 137Cs into the Atmosphere of the United States Unfortunately, the lie that not enough radiation was released to cause harm has been told so often by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, GPU, and others, it has become part of the "official science." Many of us, as "human dosimeters," unaware of the accident, reported radiation symptoms during the accident, but the authorities responsible for protecting our health and safety refused to look into our allegations. The NRC omitted evidence of dose limit violations and they never fined TMI's owner Metropolitan Edison (Met-Ed) for overdosing the public. All of the critical radiation monitors at the plant went off-scale during the accident. The authorities, however, misrepresented one radiation monitor as having remained "on-scale" during the accident when it did not. And they shamelessly prohibited conclusions of any health damage, when in fact there are many. (Click Here For Verification) CLICK HERE for site that has documents of the accident, including: transcripts and audio recordings of interviews collected at the time, government and industry documents not readily available in other places, photographs and newspaper coverage. Reprot Links Three Mile Island Radiation Releases to Higher Cancer Rates Although the three mile island plant is scheduled to be decontaminated and decommissioned in 2009, if GPU requests a five-year extension on its license, these activities will not begin until 2014 — fully 35 years after the accident and the highly radio active melted core will continue to be stored in the middle of the Susquehanna River. Power Nuclear Reactors regularly release radioactive emissions into the atmosphere. These emissions, which include Cesium 137, Iodine 131, and Strontium 90, settle on land and in water. When ingested by humans these radioactive isotopes are absorbed into bones, fatty tissue, and glands where they can cause damage for decades. Cancer rates have been found to be 16 percent higher in counties that are within 100 miles of a Power Nuclear Reactor. (Click Here For Verification) Are there routine emissions from a nuclear power reactor such as Seabrook Station? Yes, the release of radioactivity into our air, water, and soil is not strictly limited to an accident at a Power Nuclear Reactor. All it takes is the plant's everyday routine operation, and federal regulations permit these radioactive releases as long as they contain "permissible" levels of contamination. Legally permissible does not mean safe. Radioactive releases from a nuclear power reactor's routine operation often are not fully detected or reported. Accidental releases may not be completely verified or documented. (Click Here For Verification) Cancer Caused by Emissions from power Nuclear Reactors There is much more to be discussed on this issue. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
