Home | About | Donate

Watch: Greenpeace Crashes Superman Drone Into Nuclear Power Plant to Expose Facility's Dangers


#1

Watch: Greenpeace Crashes Superman Drone Into Nuclear Power Plant to Expose Facility's Dangers

Jessica Corbett, staff writer

Greenpeace France on Tuesday crashed a drone dressed as Superman into the Bugey nuclear energy plant, located about 20 miles east of Lyon, to expose how vulnerable that facility is to a terrorist attack and highlight the broader dangers of this type of power generation.


#2

How “peaceful” was that act, Greenpeace?


#3

Thanks to Greenpeace for having the guts to break through the denialist silence from “authorities” about the stupidity and absolutely unacceptable risks posed by these monstrosities.

We, the People, and the Earth, require FAR LESS TOTAL ENERGY PRODUCED for the human economy.


#4

That reactor containment building is designed to withstand an attack by any kind of warhead-equipped drone or hijacked aircraft - the exception being bunker-buster type penetrating bombs or missiles, and what do you think the chances of some terrorist organization getting a hold of them is?


#5

A few days ago, a my wife got a CT scan (which uses radiation) - performed as part of an ER workup after a car accident with her 88 year old mother driving (both are fine - just bruises from the air bags). The CT scan incidentally revealed two nodules in her left lung and due to the appearance of the larger 2 cm one, has an elevated chance, at this point, of being lung cancer (no she never smoked and is a health/food fanatic). Next will be a PET scan - which used radioisotope tracers made in nuclear reactors. If it looks cancerous on the PET scan, the next step is a biopsy - aided by, guess what? a radiation-emitting CT machine. And if we are unlucky and it proves to be malignant, the next series of treatments will be surgery, and, yes, maybe gamma treatments using Cs137 or Co40 made in, guess what? A nuclear reactor.

I an optimistic of a good prognosis even if it is a worst-case diagnosis, because the CT scan detected it early.

So right now I really don’t have any patience with nuclear-technology-phobes. Nuclear and x-ray technology may have already, or may be needed to save my wife’s life. And nuclear medical diagnostic and treatment technology has saved millions of lives since it was developed.


#6

Cue the nuclear energy shills, who think only of industry profits, or other selfish interests, and not about the inherent deadliness of nuclear fuels


#7

It’s a good thing that drone technology did not exist seventeen years ago. It could have created a great distraction, don’t you know.


#8

Engineers have always assured us “Nothing can go wrong” and yet there is an endless litany of industrial disasters, now to the point of compromising the basic functions of the ecology and experiencing an accelerating and cascading mass extinction event. i trust your reassurance as much as i trust any corporate mouthpiece. And i trust Greenpeace far more.

Sad still, to see you morph into a “centrist” apologist for brutality and corporate politics.


#9

Thank you WiseOwl, that was wonderful----and right before 7/4 too : )


#10

Why is Greenpeace on the dumb side of the nuclear power “debate”?


#11

A comic opera to forewarn of a tragedic fate


#12

WTF!!!..acts of civil disobedience are needed but was this really the smartest thing to do? I mean for christ sake, we are talking radioactivity here, no matter how ‘safe’ they think the action was. Get a grip Greenpeace.


#13

The number of lives lost and injuries in the nuclear industry are tiny compared to the fossil fuel and chemical industries. Please come down to the fact-based universe! And when the carbon footprint of a USAn is down to anything close to a French person’s carbon footprint then maybe you can criticize their electric infrastructure.

And if you really believe what you wrote, than why are you here on the internet - using plastics, electronics, and electricity? You probably even use a fossil fuel car on a daily basis!

Sorry, but in my stateless worker-run society, we will have no room for Luddites, only people.

And yes, I am really thankful for life saving modern nuclear medicine right now…


#14

A little plastic drone is not going to even put a scratch on 3 meters of heavily reinforced concrete…


#15

I doubt that is how the media is going to portray this act though. If anything there will be calls to label this action an act of terrorism.


#16

You wouldn’t know it, but this has been tested a while ago by running an F-54 Phantom fighter plane into a concrete wall.

Notice the aluminum jet basically becomes dust.

Also, recall a Jet airliner is slower, much larger, and is also made of aluminum entirely, and don’t forget 9/11. Not that it matters, this will be deleted, because I’m being informative.


#17

Paid nuke apologists are having a field day with this story, betcha - lol. Yep. Nukes are evil. Nukes gotta go. Shut 'em down. A.S.A.P. Shoulda been done long ago. The metallic-tasting radionuclide nano-particles in the used radioactive rods are every efin where, now - and in us! Same with plastic - in us. Same with PFOA or C8 is in everybody! “Consumerism” is based on lies and that those lies include “safe” nuclear energy.


#18

You people are absolute idiots. That “facility that houses radioactive material” is over 3 feet of concrete reinforced with rebar thicker than your arm. Your “superman” drone won’t affect it… and a 747 won’t either. Good grief. Give up your stupid ideals. A nuclear plant exhausts 0 (ZERO) carbon and 0 (ZERO) radioactivity. By contrast a coal plant exhausts both carbon and radioactivity (quite a lot of radioactivity). I’m sure you stewards of science must know that coal is quite radioactive, right? What a bunch of morons!!! It IS!


#19

I got news for you, a fighter plane at mach 3 won’t put a dent into it.

Now, a missile is a different story. It’s not like this wasn’t thought about during the 1950’s during the height of the Cold War…


#20

Well, then why don’t we falsely accuse Trump of being a puppet of Russia? I mean, the US just overthrew Ukraine with a coup and then lied about Russia seizing Crimea, all the while having NATO make a massive build up near the Russian Federation in Poland under Obama, and on top of that, trying to destroy Syria by lying about Assad gassing civilians because Syria has Russia’s only Middle Eastern base.

Plus the United States surrounded Russia with ABM’s after George W. Bush unilaterally withdrew the US from the ABM treaty in 2002.

Because nuclear war won’t be so bad, right? That’s what the lunatics that control the United States have been threatening for 16 years and the current hysterical left is now promoting Cold War II at best, and nuclear annihilation at worst. If the US goes to war with Russia, that’s the end of life on Earth.

But let’s worry about a stupid drone flying into a nuclear power plant instead and if Trump slept with what amounts to a prostitute…