[ RadSafe ] Beyond Nuclear Claims after Washington Post Article

[John R Johnson]

All

I agree with Bill, even though he lives in Ontario and I live in British
Colombia.

John

On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 6:05 AM, Bill Prestwich <prestwic at mcmaster.ca> wrote:

> I hope Radsafe folks support the editorial. As a Canadian, I think if I
> responded the opposition would denounce foreign intervention.
>
> I did support the fact that this was a non-event in an E-mail to Cindy.
>
> Bill
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu
> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Roger Helbig
> Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 6:09 PM
> To: radsafe at agni.phys.iit.edu
> Subject: [ RadSafe ] Beyond Nuclear Claims after Washington Post Article
>
> This was sent to another list by a member Peter -
>
> Dear friends and colleagues,
>
> Please see the exemplary response written to the Washington Post's
> industry-serving editorial.  And please send them a response that educates
> them on energy and people's awareness of the environment.
> Let's remember that it's not all about the supply side, despite the anxiety
> that's generated by the nuclear industry -- and that the cheapest energy is
> what we don't use.
>
>     Thanks, Peter :^ )}
>
> ________________________________
> From: Cindy Folkers, Beyond Nuclear [mailto:cindy at beyondnuclear.org]
>
> THE BEYOND NUCLEAR BULLETIN
>
> Washington Post calls Fukushima “non-catastrophic”!
> The editorial board needs to hear from you!
>
> We’re outraged. And we expect you were, too. On April 23, 2012, the
> Washington Post editorial board writers callously dismissed the Fukushima
> nuclear disaster as “non-catastrophic.”
>
> They eagerly promoted nuclear power while omitting inconvenient
> deal-breakers such as cost, waste, safety, health risks and human rights.
> The paper taunted Germany and Japan - and the anti-nuclear movement - for
> looking to renewables but misrepresented Germany’s successes. And they
> utterly ignored those who have already paid the price for the nuclear fuel
> chain, like indigenous uranium miners, and its newest victims, the children
> of Japan whose future has been stolen. You can review the original
> editorial
> here.
>
> Let’s tell the Washington Post what we think about their shoddy editorial!
>
> We rebutted a few of their points below. A longer rebuttal document is on
> our website. Please use these mythbusters to send the editorial board sacks
> of old-fashioned mail! Write to The Washington Post, 1150 15th St. NW,
> Washington, DC 20071-0001. Or email or call editorial page editor, Fred
> Hiatt at fredhiatt at washpost.com or 202-334-7281. You can also contact the
> Ombudsman, Patrick Pexton, at ombudsman at washpost.com.
>
> Here are some of the WP myths and our responses:
>
> WP: The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster was “scary but ultimately
> non-catastrophic.”
> FACT: Minimizing the still unfolding consequences of the Fukushima nuclear
> disaster and dismissing it as “non-catastrophic” is reprehensible and
> irresponsible. Radioactive contamination is widespread and growing. In
> fact,
> the accident is not even over, yet.
> Thousands are already suffering and countless more will sicken and die
> prematurely as a result of their exposure to the Fukushima radiation.
> A 20km (12.4 mile) area around the stricken reactors will remain a “dead
> zone” for decades and potentially centuries. It is hard to know what more
> the Post editorial writers need to qualify as “catastrophic.”
>
> WP: Nuclear power “is the only proven source of low-emissions ‘baseload’
> power.”
> FACT: In many regions, peak wind and solar production match up well with
> peak electricity demand. Numerous regional and global case studies have
> provided plausible plans to meet 100% of energy demand with energy
> efficiency and renewable sources.
>
> WP: Germany and Japan are “giving up all of that guaranteed, low-carbon
> electricity generation in an anti-nuclear frenzy.”
> FACT: Far from “guaranteed,” the Fukushima reactors became a liability when
> they were needed most, worsening an already catastrophic situation. And far
> from in a “frenzy”,  Germany has already revitalized home-grown industries
> like steel and has more people working in the renewable sector (370,000)
> than in the nuclear (30,000) and coal industries (20,000) combined.
>
> WP MYTH: “Japan could still reduce carbon emissions by 25 percent of its
> 1990 levels by 2030 without nuclear power. Yet even if that’s true, it’s
> hardly a reason to let all of that existing nuclear infrastructure and
> know-how go to waste.”
> FACT: The nuclear industry has always been in the waste business -
> unmanaged
> radioactive waste. Since December 2, 1942, when scientists created the
> world’s first self-sustaining nuclear chain reaction, the industry’s entire
> infrastructure has gone to waste: here in the U.S.
> it has produced more than 67,000 metric tons of irradiated nuclear fuel -
> and at least another 10,000 metric tons of radioactive waste from nuclear
> weapons - with nowhere to go.
>
> Read the rest of our responses to the Washington Post editorial here.
>
>
> http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=kNIRjpoZInh2uEz4XyDb1o
> p3RbqXG7NA<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=kNIRjpoZInh2uEz4XyDb1op3RbqXG7NA>
>
> I am not sure what nuclear power has to do with Democracy in Action - the
> anti-nuclear fanatics have very little interest in Democracy since they
> silence their opponents.
>
> Thank you for working with us for a nuclear-free world.
>
> The Beyond Nuclear Team
> www.beyondnuclear.org
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the
> RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> visit:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu
>
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
> the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
>