Home | About | Donate

Grassroots Pressure Escalates to Shut Down Diablo Canyon Nuke Plant


#1

Grassroots Pressure Escalates to Shut Down Diablo Canyon Nuke Plant

Harvey Wasserman

The two reactors at Diablo Canyon are the last ones still operating in California. And the grassroots pressure to shut them down is escalating.

Together grassroots activists have shut three California reactors at San Onofre, between Los Angeles and San Diego and one each at Rancho Seco, near Sacramento and at Humboldt, perched on an earthquake zone in the north.

Proposed construction at Bodega Bay and near Bakersfield has also been stopped.


#2

Wasserman, I cannot take your shtick at face value.

Nobody could innocently be so cork-brained as to ignore the technologies that kill millions of nameable people EVERY YEAR in favor of fearmongering against nukes which, even given the expired technology and the uncaring skimping on safety by the Capitalists, have a death toll far below the petroleum/coal combustion methodologies. Nobody's that dim.

The "cui bono?" principle suggests that you're getting money from the coal/oil industry, whether directly or indirectly. Unless you're doing it for pure, psychopathic enjoyment.


#3

Harvey Wasserman has been working against nuclear energy for over 30 years. This is from the wikipedia article on him.

Anti-nuclear work[edit]

In 1973 he helped pioneer the global grassroots movement against atomic reactors, and helped coin the phrase "No Nukes" in 1974.[3] He was a media spokesperson for the Clamshell Alliance, and helped organize mass demonstrations at Seabrook, N.H. against reactors being built there.[4] Rolling Stone magazine featured Wasserman in its 1979 cover story on the Musicians United for Safe Energy (MUSE), which staged five concerts organized by Wasserman in Madison Square Garden in 1979 shortly after the Three Mile Island accident, including New York City's 1979 "No Nukes" concerts and rally (featuring Bruce Springsteen, Bonnie Raitt, Jackson Browne, CSN, James Taylor and others).[5]
Education[edit]

Here is the song Solartopia written and performed by Pete Seger for Harvey


#4

I don't doubt it for a moment. But that doesn't make it non-pathological.


#5

Mairead said:

TJ Says:
Warning Readers:

Mairead is the "cork-brain" here, not Harvey Wasserman. By her own admission she does not understand anything at all about nuclear power and by her own admission she FAILED PHYSICS because her concentration is mind control and nothing technical. She claims to have been an engineer but is completely ignorant on even basic engineering terms and concepts. She will not answer my charge that she is probably paid to post slander and libel good, honest citizens like Harvey Wasserman.

Nuke-Sunshine-Pumper Mairead is not qualified at all to determine what is, and what is not "fear-mongering" since she does not understand how nuke plants work, and she has never been able to refute any of my rebuttles about her constant errors and misconceptions on all matters regarding the dangers of ionizing radiation.

Mairead lies implying Harvey Wasserman is taking money from the coal industry. I challenge you, Mairead to prove your assertion that Wasserman is taking money from the coal industry. On the contrary, Harvey Wasserman is a true American hero, and Mairead, is a coward, libeling Wasserman behind the safety of a computer screen in a boiler room somewhere working for the Empire.

JMHO's only.

TJ
p.s. Nuke plants use coal-fired power from the grid since they are so notoriously unreliable and must be shut down for months every time there is a Earthquake or dangerous technical problem (which is constant on these death-traps). Cancer is now the second biggest killer of Americans and slated to become number one shortly. Radioisotope leaks from nuke plants cause the number one killer in America: Heart Failure.


#6

I thought it was obesity. But i guess I only talked to people with an agenda against the food industry. Maybe anti nukers and anti foodies gotta oughtta have a sitdown and straighten it out smile


#7

"Radioisotope leaks from nuke plants cause the number one killer in America: Heart Failure."

This statement is utterly untrue. It is so blatantly untrue I actually would assume that TJ knows it is untrue. If so, that makes the statement a lie. In any case, any halfway decent study of the operation of Nuclear Power plants would show that there are no such leaks. The allowable radiation levels near Nuclear plants is lower than the average background radiation level.

Leaks of a magnitude necessary to have the result TJ claims would be massive, and would instantly be detected and would cause absolute outrage among scientists. TJ cannot supply any proof of his assertion, since none exists.

Of all power generation methods, Nuclear Energy is the safest by far, having the lowest death rate per MWH. Coal, of course, is the worst, causing thousands of early deaths due to pollution each year - and then you add in the horrendous effect on Climate Change.

This Nuclear safety record is established in spite of the age of many present Nuclear Plants. There are far safer designs that need to be built, The MSR/LFTR (Molten Salt Reactor/Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor) is totally fail safe. They are "walk away safe" meaning once running, all operators could simply leave. Any problem threatening overheating of the core would immediately result in cold shut-down with no operator intervention needed, no backup power required, no external cooling necessary.

These reactors can use present stockpiles of Nuclear Waste and stockpiles of plutonium as fuel, giving us hundreds of years of power from that source alone, and eliminating the storage problem.

Read "Super Fuel: Thorium, the Green Energy Source for the Future" by Richard Martin

See 3w dot timothymaloney dot net for excellent graphic presentations and discussions of related issues.


#8

Have you ever heard of Three Mile Island or Fukushima?


#9

Pro Nuker "James38" said:

TJ says:
All nuke plants leak. ALL. You admit this yourself when you claim: "The allowable radiation levels near Nuclear Power plants is lower than the average background radiation level."

According to the Department of Energy NO amount of radiation over background is safe.
(you have to add background to leaked nuke plant radioisotope sources to get exposure; you don't compare them to each other, you dolt!)

You ADD them, and it's way over anything we evolved with, so nuke plants are dangerous. This has been confirmed with recent studies you ignore that show even low-levels of radiation cause a whole myriad of ailments including heart failure and cancer. The big lie you in the nuke industry peddle, is that since your leakage through NRC sanctioned emissions towers which had to be installed on Mark I Nuke plants since the workers were maxing out on Rems/Seiverts/etc, is less than background radiation the downwinders inhale and ingest, that somehow they are safe.

Downwinders and Nuke Plant workers have MORE cancer than the general population, which is why workers must wear dosimeters and radiation suits.

Here is the proof from the NIH (National Institute of Health):

Cardiovascular disease and cancer are the two leading causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide [1]. Over the last half century, radiation therapy (RT) has evolved to become one of the cornerstones of treatment for various types of cancers. It is estimated that more than 50% of patients with cancer are treated with radiotherapy. Along with the development of novel chemotherapeutic agents, radiation therapy (RT) has revolutionized the prognosis of patients with various cancers. Many childhood and adolescent years cancers are now successfully treated and these patients go on to live an active and normal adult life, as evident by an increasing number of cancer survivors [2]. Late cardiovascular effects are seen often in cancer survivors. Amongst Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) patients who have received radiation, cardiovascular disease (CVD) is of the most common causes of death. Studies have shown that these patients have an increased risk for Coronary Artery Disease (CAD), valvular heart disease, congestive heart failure (CHF), pericardial disease and sudden death. The risk is particularly high in patients treated before the age of 40 years [3–6].

The reported relative risk of death from a fatal myocardial infarction in patients treated with mediastinal RT is increased from 1.5 to 3.0 times that of unirradiated patients [7, 8]. In young patients undergoing mediastinal irradiation, myocardial ischemia and CAD is very prevalent [9]. A meta-analysis of eight randomized trials found a 62% increase in cardiac deaths among women who were treated with radiation therapy [10]. Even at lower radiation doses, there appears to be of excess risk of cardiovascular disease as shown in the Japanese atomic bomb survivors [11]. Due to improvement in radiation technique, the risk of cardiovascular complications in relation to radiation may have declined over time, but even in patients treated as lately as between 1979 and 1986 the risk congestive heart failure and valvular dysfunction remained increased [12].

Radiation damage to the heart can involve the pericardium, myocardium, valves, and coronary vessels with pericardium being most frequently involved [13, 14]. Radiation damages the vascular endothelium, and hence radiation-induced vascular injury occurs in the field of radiation exposure. Damage to the capillary vessels manifests as telangiectasia, whereas thrombotic, inflammatory, and fibrogenic complications in larger vessels can result in peripheral, coronary and carotid artery disease. Table 1 lists the possible radiation induced cardiovascular complications.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3159113/

Furthermore,

Although the nuke industry now dishonestly claims the Three Mile Island disaster was contained, the government's own witness in the lawsuit by dying downwinders stated that hundreds of millions of curries of radiation were present when the reactor at TMI-2 exploded and that ten percent of this escaped. All radiation detectors inside and outside the facility pegged out off-scale high causing the medical staff to flee. The nuke industry claimed zero readings from melted detectors meant no radiation escaped (a blatant lie.) Also, NRC transcripts of recorded phone lines during the emergency claimed that it was "a situation of no containment." A few months later the Hershy Chocolate Plant 100 miles downwind of Three Mile Island (TMI) detected TMI radiation in their milk cows and had to destroy all of them.

So your claim that nuke plants don't leak and that nobody has died from 104 creaking, leaking, 40-year-old deathtraps in the USA is absurd.

TJ
p.s., your Magic Thorium reactor claims are bogus as well. The molten salt reactor experiment at Oakridge in the 60's was a failure causing the most expensive cleanup in history (which is why they were never built.) The "Magic" Thorium reactor you gush over actually has a dangerous U-235 reactor at it's core. So it's nothing but more bullchit marketing promises by the most dishonest industry in history.


#10

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#11

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#12

Sure. But instead of focusing on the nonsensical, handwaved claims of the fearmongers, many of whom are self-interested power-seekers, you should look at the VERIFIABLE DEATH TOLL from the extraction and use of each kind of energy.

Unless you do that, you're just another low-knowledge dupe, believing whatever you're told rather than having the solid knowledge that comes only from doing careful research yourself.


#13

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#14

Did you read through that NIH cite? Fairlie (the author) is using sleight-of-tongue as his methodology. Combining the results of several small studies as though they were one study isn't good methodology. It's a little bit like collecting 10 measurements, 9 at one-decimal accuracy and 1 at two-decimal, and deciding that since you have that one with two-decimal, you can treat them all as being two-decimal.

As he acknowledges, the original study authors concluded that there might be something going on, but there's so far too much noise to determine what that something might be.

Enenews is a sensationalist internet tabloid. All you have to do is read their National-Inquirer-type headlines to know that they're doing frisson-entertainment. Don't be surprised if they one day claim that alien bodies have been found under that Fukushima reactor.


#15

Actually, there is. Look up "radiation hormesis". Also look at Calabrese's work: University of Massachusetts Amherst environmental toxicologist Edward Calabrese, whose career research shows that low doses of some chemicals and radiation are benign or even helpful, says he has uncovered evidence that one of the fathers of radiation genetics, Nobel Prize winner Hermann Muller, knowingly lied when he claimed in 1946 that there is no safe level of radiation exposure. https://www.umass.edu/newsoffice/article/umass-amherst-researcher-points-suppression-evidence-radiation-effects-1946-nobel-laureate


#18

The "leakage" to which you refer is constantly monitored and fixed, and in virtually all cases is very small to start with...You go on to say "According to the Department of Energy NO amount of radiation over background is safe." This opens another can of worms. What do you think "background" means? There are places in the world (including parts of Colorado, Finland, India, Iran, etc) where "background" radiation is far higher than the average, yet in none of these places are there found any negative effects. One ancient stone house in Iran is famous for having the highest measured background radiation level anywhere, has been inhabited by generations of people, and none of them show any increase in any disease. An apartment complex in Taiwan was accidentally built using rebar contaminated with Cobalt 60. This was not discovered for 20 years. During those years 8000 people were exposed to an average of 400 mSv of radiation. In such a group the LNT (Linear No Threshold theory holding that all radiation is dangerous) would expect 242 cases of cancer. The normal medical prediction for that many people would be 186 cases. The actual number of cases of cancer in that group of 8000 was 5. Five. This is clear support for the hormesis concept, stating that up to levels significantly higher than average background, additional exposure to radiation is actually beneficial. (See "Thorium, Energy Cheaper Than Coal" by Robert Hargraves, page 327,)

It is important to realize that the amount of Uranium and Thorium in Coal Fly Ash releases levels of radiation far in excess of anything coming from either background or nuclear facilities. But that is not the real danger of coal. Much more dangerous are the amounts of mercury and other toxic heavy metals that are constantly released into ground water and atmosphere by the smokestack emissions and the immense piles of ash accumulating around all coal fired plants. And THEN you have the Climate-Change-causing amounts of CO2 dumped into the atmosphere.

Germany, in spite of all the publicity about their increasing amount of energy from "renewables", is using more coal than ever. Because of nuclear fear-mongering, they are closing down their excellent and very safe nuclear industry. This is a foolish mistake.

We all need to realize that eliminating the burning of all fossil fuels - Coal, oil, and natural gas - must be accomplished as rapidly as possible. Modern much safer Nuclear power, especially MSR/LFTR, gives us clean energy 24/7, without the need to hugely expand the grid, and without the very high expense in materials (thus CO2 footprint) and the land used by wind/solar. Just one interesting fact: A single large wind turbine has more steel in its structure than the containment vessel of the largest nuclear reactor ever built.


#19

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#20

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#21

Mairead,

Since you failed Physics and have no medical training at all, and also have no experience at all in handling ionizing radiation, you are unqualified to do "careful research yourself". When someone like you, who's background is head-shrinking, ignores the 800,000 (now over One Million) dead downwinders of the Chernobyl explosion reported by Russian Scientists in the New York Academy of Sciences, we know you aren't interested in the truth.

You have a dishonest agenda to smear honest citizens like Harvey Wassermann, claiming he is fear-mongering, when in reality, The two largest causes of American death are Cardiovascular failure and Cancer, both of which are caused by the 104 leaking nuke plants in the USA. They are a known, leaking radiation source. In fact, the NRC prescribes allowable ionizing radiation releases from them each month despite the past Department of Energy guidance that no amount of radiation over natural background is safe.

Your illogical charge of "handwaving" that you constantly level at whistleblowers is nothing but a shabby rhetorical trick, and has nothing whatsoever to do with the careful research that industry experts Arnie Gundersen, Dr Helen Caldicott, Nuclear engineer David Lolbalm, Scientist Marco Kaltofen and many other credible experts have published.

See my response to James38 in this thread showing that even low dose radiation causes Cardiovascular failure and cancer in humans, according to the National Institute of Health (NIH.)

Unlike you, these are qualified experts with actual experience dealing with the dangers of ionizing radiation upon humans.

TJ


#22

Um. Alligator, would you provide actual citations for this claim? If you don't provide clear and verifiable support, we must ignore this statement, understanding it as another example of "anti-nuke propaganda. I find it highly unlikely that refueling, which is done inside the containment structure, is somehow exposed to wind. You seem to have a truly primitive mental picture of a reactor, sitting in the open air, with the lid off and the core exposed to the elements, This is actually a very funny image. Why, imagine the consternation if there were a sudden rainstorm. "Oh my gawd, its raining!! Quick, get the lid!!! What do you mean you can't find it? I put it right over there by the porta-potty!
.
"enenews" is NOT a reliable source of verifiable information.

[quote="aligatorhardt, post:11, topic:12180"]
"those who are receiving the hot particles are getting a far larger dose than the average figures suggest, and further many of these hot particles are settling on crops, so internal exposures are retained and multiplied, and cannot be lowered through any shielding"

If serious amounts of such "hot" particles were being released, what you say would be true. Now we need to see some actual proof that such "hot" particles are indeed being released. It would also be interesting if you could explain from exactly which part of the sealed fuel element the "hot particles" are escaping. Those fuel elements are removed and replaced long before the cladding starts to break down.

Also, you will need to identify the "hot particles" by actual isotopic composition. "hot particle" is not a scientific term, but it makes good scary-sounding propaganda for the technically challenged and credulous,, and that seems to be what you are attempting to produce.