Don't need another Godzilla.
I'm grateful that entrepreneurs are working to resolve this ongoing nuclear
disaster. I wish this company success and hope they make millions in the
process, paid for by the Japanese government and citizens. But I
also hope that Americans recognize the risks of nuclear power and how disasters
have to be bought and paid for -- either by taxpayers or ratepayers. Nuclear is
NOT cheap, clean energy. All too often, I hear conservatives
promote nuclear power -- even in Utah where water necessary for nuclear is so
scarce -- and proclaim a Fukushima-style event as "unlikely" here. Meanwhile, a new Dept. of Energy report says that wind power -- booming
across the country (but not here) -- is at the lowest price ever, and it will
continue to fall as local manufacturing economies of scale and technology
advance. Solar is also growing as prices drop, but Utah may face "solar
fees" to curb its growth because the utility monopoly worries home solar is
hurting its coal interests.Renewable energy is clean and price
stable. And wind and solar spills cost nothing for clean up.
I have read articles that talk about nuclear power plants that don't
produce much waste, because they turn what would have been waste into energy.
Going forward wouldn't the real solution be to mandate that those type of
power plants be used?
I shake my head when I read articles like this. Yes,radiation has special
hazards and it's good that there is technology to help stop the leak, but
it appears that most of the people that write these articles have no notion of
what an isotope, half-life, Becquerel or Sievert is. Despite its peculiar
dangers, you always know where radioactive isotopes are and what's
happening to them. We can detect traces of these isotopes (Iodine and Cesium)
at incredibly low levels. The detected radiation in the Fukushima leakage is a
tiny fraction of that which is allowed in drinking water (in Bequerels/m3) and
much lower than many naturally occurring background radiation sources (such as
those granite counter-tops in my kitchen). Also some articles (not this one)
speak of "radioactive water" and it's pretty clear from the wording
that the writer didn't understand that the water itself is not radioactive,
but is carrying traces of isotopes. Actually, the drifting refuse from the
quake is much more hazardous but doesn't get any press. There's a fine
line between willful ignorance and intent to deceive to promote a
self-proclaimed "righteous" agenda.