Home | About | Donate

'Neutral is Not Acceptable': Nationwide Protests Demand Colleges Go Fossil Free


#1


#2

University is an institution society has produced to educate the young. The unique position of university includes a duty to act in a moral manner as an example.

Divestiture from an industry that is knowingly racing to maximize profits before Earth's life support systems collapse is also sound investment advise.


#3

I still need a good explanation of how divesting from an oil company does anything if one continues to buy and burn their products? Am I missing something?


#6

Well, yeah, you're missing most all of it, including your take on nuclear power terrorism from decrepit plants. By all means keep investing in, and defending, poison energy.......


#9

That's a real brainy analysis professor.


#11

Federal government needs to sponsor renewable substitutes for petroleum products. Joule Unlimited has four genetically engineered photosynthetic microbes: they all will grow in clear plastic tubes containing water and plant nutrients and some starter culture for the GE microbe for that tube, One variety makes ethanol, one gasoline, one diesel, and one kerosene (aka jet fuel for aviation). A worker does need to care for the microbe cultures, alternating between starting a new tube with water and plant nutrients including CO2 and a bit of starter culture from the old tube before it gets overcrowded and dies of overcrowding and starvation for pant nutrients, AND harvesting the product from the old tube and preparing it with water and plant nutrients to be the new tube to be inoculated with culture from what is soon to be the old tube. That is one possible way to make renewable substitutes for petroleum products. Another way would be to use electricity from renewable energy for as much of our energy needs as possible including transportation--electric buses and trucks getting power from overhead wires along fixed routes, electric trains, battery electric passenger cars and delivery vans. Maybe some of both.


#13

There are always some nuclear shills and apologists around to defend the indefensible and misrepresent the facts. Oyster Creek nuke plant is the oldest and some say "most dangerous plant in the US" The NRC approvals for more years of threats to the public is par for their role as nuke cheerleader - not a public safety watchdog!! The exact same reactor as melted down at Fukushima has had numerous serious safety issues over the years."during Hurricane Sandy, the nuclear power plants intake structure was flooded with six and a half feet of water as a result of the storm surge" - "Oyster Creek will close in 2019, 10 years earlier than planned"

The premature end of a nuke plant cancer study is highly suspect and may rise to the level of a cover-up!
"The Nuclear Regulatory Commission yesterday said it has ended a yet-to-be completed study begun five years ago to assess cancer risks near U.S. nuclear facilities, including the Oyster Creek plant in Lacey Township.
"In a brief three-paragraph press the government agency said continuing the work was impractical, given the significant amount of time and resources it would have to expend, as well as its current budget constraints." Typical corruption and complicity from the NRC shills putting industry profits ahead of public safety!

You should really do your homework before you try to blow smoke up the readers bums.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/3/7/309316/-

http://phys.org/news/2011-03-oldest-nuclear-reactor-disaster.html

http://www.njspotlight.com/stories/15/09/08/feds-pull-plug-on-cancer-risk-study-near-nuclear-plants-including-oyster-creek/


#18

Abiotic is real. Check it out! Could be as simple as carbon, heat & pressure. Good thing as we (the world) probably ran out of dino's years ago.


#19

Empathy.


#20

One more university administration integrity issue:

Your university president or her/his predecessor probably signed a document promising that the university would work with local inventors to fight climate change. Then the university realized that actually taking this action would (gasp) not make money for the university. So, being in a field where integrity is everything, they said, "#$%^& this @#$%^&!"


#21

It's currently a felony under the Japanese state secrets act for Japanese citizens to print anything bad about Fukushima. ENENews reports massive casualties, especially cancer and horrid birth defects, in the northern half of the Japanese main island of Honshu.


#22

My apologies, your "professional qualifications" and work history in the nuclear field clearly rise above the term shill. Nuclear plants produced power and also negative impacts/consequences, such as spent fuel with no place to safely "dispose" of it, increased breast-cancer and leukemia clusters around nuke plants and leaks from aged plants. It is suspicious the NRC ended a cancer study prematurely before completion citing costs - I suppose they consider cancer victims "less valuable" than industry profits. World-wide cancer rates may be the result of atmospheric radiation spread from nuclear activity/"accidents".

Contamination of ground water, "normal" "atmospheric release" spikes, and threats from ocean rise and earthquakes are also not mentioned. It seems clear there are "green" alternatives IF government would pour as much into development as maintaining the nuclear industry and its enormous costs.

The Fukushima disasters continue to pour contaminated water into the pacific - some estimates state 50 cubic miles of water - with no end in sight.
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2014/03/fukushima-200-million-gallons-of-highly.html

As far as "verifiable facts" go, I'm unsure of your criteria for "verification" - you failed to mention increased cancer rates as a result of "normal" operation of plants or the enormous costs to dismantle and restore nuke plant sites to pre-industrial condition with costs born by the industry rather than the public/taxpayers - these are serious issues that you fail to address.

It seems to me technologies more life-friendly are more beneficial and sustainable to humankind than inherently deadly, very costly methods, like nuclear, of energy production.

http://www.theday.com/article/20150908/NWS01/150909423


#25

Empathy to who? The oil companies? The sue of fossil fuels will stop when people stop using fossil fuels.


#26

This discussion on nuclear power is entirely off-topic, but since you started it, this is my contribution to the discussion:

Energy Source Mortality Rates; Deaths/yr/TWh

Coal – world average, 161
Coal – China, 278
Coal – USA, 15
Oil – 36
Natural Gas – 4
Biofuel/Biomass – 12
Peat – 12
Solar/rooftop – 0.44-0.83
Wind – 0.15
Hydro – world, 0.10
Hydro – world*, 1.4
Nuclear – 0.04

  • Includes the 170,000 deaths from the failure of the Banquao Reservoir Dam in China in 1975

#27

"There is a dangerous radiological threat to the West Coast of the United States that puts the health of millions of Americans at risk. It includes dangers to public health, dangers to the food supply, and dangers to future generations from long-lived radionuclides, including some of the most toxic material in the world. It is not Fukushima, it is Hanford."


#28

If my prey is the oil company, I strike when and where my opponent is weak. Don't nip the giant around the feet, Chop Off an Arm whilst he's distracted.