Re: FW: - Climate Change Hearings and the roll(?) of nuclear power

[Kai Kaletsch <info@eic.nu>]

From: "Franz Schoenhofer" <franz.schoenhofer@CHELLO.AT>



> The  two mechanisms that I am aware of where carbon is fixed for a long

time

> are:

>

> 1. Sediments of seashells and corals become limestone. This happens in the

> ocean. (If A-bomb testing kills the coral, the process stops. [Now this

post

> is relevant to the list again.])

>

> -----------------------------------------------------------------

>

> Sorry to say, this is mere nonsense. This has been put forward by some

> "independent" Greenpeace members, disguising themselves as experts and

> correlating the problems currently encountered with corals in the Pacific

> Ocean to the French nuclear tests at Mururoa and Fangataufa. This is

similar

> nonsense like relating the birth of a child to the stork - a European

fairy

> tale. Also ciguatera - a disease caused by eating reef fish which have fed

> on deceased corals - was related to the french bomb tests by the same

> groups. While I am personally not a supporter of nuclear tests I have been

> the head of the terrestrial group in the International Mururoa Project,

> assessing the radiological impact of the French tests. The results of our

> findings can be found in the very comprehensive report which has been

> published by the IAEA - you can find it at the IAEA web-site.

>

> Does your remark mean, that you believe in this nonsense?



The way it was explained to me, by someone who is not a Greenpeace member

(to my knowledge), is that the blast tremors shatter the coral. (It has

nothing to do with radiation.) The killed coral was supposed to be the most

significant environmental impact of the tests. This info was given to me a

few days after the last  tests and would have been based on calculations or

earlier tests, rather than observation of the results of the last tests.



So, to answer your question: Yes, I believe in this nonsense, but it is not

a believe that I must cling to, to keep the rest of my worldview intact. So,

if you can point me to a reference that shows the blast does not kill coral,

then I'll drop the belief.



If there is no coral kill, what is then the most significant environmental

impact of the tests?



Best Regards,

Kai



************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.

You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/