Home | About | Donate

'San Andreas' Blockbuster Has Huge Radioactive Omissions


#1

'San Andreas' Blockbuster Has Huge Radioactive Omissions

Harvey Wasserman

Ok. So we don’t expect much from these mega-blockbuster disaster films.

But maybe just a hint about reality could spice things up. At least maybe a passing acknowledgement that the actual San Andreas could turn the Diablo Canyon nukes into a seething heap of radioactive rubble and permanently irradiate all of California?

Is that too much to ask, even of Hollywood?

Apparently so.


#2

Wasserman as is his usual exaggerates and misleads the readers about the accident at Fukushima. In fact the plant damage did not occur directly from the earthquake but rather from the subsequent tsunami that washed over a town killing thousands and also the shore nearby to the plant. Diablo Canyon in contrast is located on a coastal bluff, 85 feet above sea level. The Fukushima plants were not damaged directly by shaking.
But no matter, you can count on Harvey to provide a Hollywood script scenario to bolster his anti-nuclear penchant.


#3

Check this out. This guy DOES his homework and shows that "the ring of fire" is now lit and along with it, increased frequency of volcano AND earthquake activity.

Rfinston and the reliably pro-nuclear power shill-brigade is, of course, up first. His computer no doubt clues him into any article by Harvey Wasserman or other whistle-blowers on the nuke industry and its unsubstantiated claims to safety. Particularly now!


#4

doggone those UFOs that keep setting off those tsunamis...


#5

Are you kidding me? Does it really freaking matter you moped! Gort! Klaatu barada nikto!


#6

Plus there are plenty of indicators that on this point Wasserman is right and Finston is (again) wrong: The magnitude 9+ quake DID cause massive damage to Reactor 1.


#7

And tragically, Gort can't hear us...


#8

The damage to all the reactors occurred due to the subsequent loss of electrical power for the cooling systems that was caused by the tsunami. None of the damage occurred as the direct result of the earthquake shaking them. Check it out, Webwalk. And that is the fallacy of Harvey's imagined scenario following a San Andreas earthquake.


#9

Do you have a cite? I'm looking, but the most I can find is from Bloomberg 4 years ago saying R1 "may have been harmed by the quake" prior to the tsunami that wrecked everything. They had a radiation alarm go off during the time between the two events. But at the time they didn't know whether it was a real alarm or the product of quake damage to the alarm itself. Do you have a pointer to something newer?


#10

There was the "Movie of the Week" 32 year ago The Day After that showed the results of all-out nuclear war with the Soviet Union, and mass radiation contamination. Talk about a movie with nothing but hopelessness. It ended with every major character either dead or heading for death from radiation sickness. The short-term survivors really did envy the instantly vaporized (not usually shown in the cable reruns). The Day After was made during the early Reagan years, when anyone even remotely progressive thought Ronnie Ray Gun was going to get us all blown up with his sabre rattling at the Ruskies. If you need a few sleepless nights to get something done, watch this pot-boiler first, but not if you're inclined to thoughts of suicide, it just might make you pick up that razor blade and head for the bathtub.


#11

Rfinston

rfinston

pro-nuke

pro-death nuclear


#12

Sorry as usual you are so wrong on the facts. rfinston actually means "false statements".


#14

and what was the tsunami caused by?


#15

it's really hard, common dreams, when you ask us to "be civil," particularly when folks show up on the site with - not only a disrespect for the forum, but more importantly - a disrespect for humanity. granted, your site still claims to be news and views for the progressive community, but, seriously....truly, there's nothing "progressive" about rfinston's comments. end of discussion. flag it if you must.


#18

As if these factors are unrelated. That's like saying a drone overhead didn't kill the kid, the debris from it did!


#19

Its called nuclear science and its pretty heavy stuff. If you have an interest you might start learning about it instead of making nonsense comments. It is, however, not something you can just pick up while stocking shelves.


#20

"... renewables cant meet current let alone future demand."

Right, i mean, who could possibly imagine the Sun producing enough energy to power a civilization? Clearly no way it could meet future demand.


#21

Definitely worth watching; thanks, Siouxrose!


#22

As usual wrong again. The systemic failure and meltdown of the core started before the tsunami struck. Just as you do both TEPCo and the Japanese government released a number of falsehoods regarding the scale of that disaster.

The Earthquake in fact destroyed all of the pipes that were to be used to cool the reactor if a meltdown started. Engineers inspecting the site indicated that this was likely to happen months before and TEPCO ignored those warnings.

The meltdown started prior to the tsunami as the cooling system had already failed.


#23

More energy in the form of sunlight strikes the earth each day in two minutes time than all of mans own energy sources added together do in an entire year.

The reason energy providers do not want to move towards solar energy is that the energy supplied by the same will truly be too cheap to meter and as such too cheap to profit off of.