"So, apart from Chernobyl, what fatalities ..."A

[Fledermaus]

The Santa Susana Field Laboratory suffered three separate nuclear reactor accidents. The Nuclear Energy Commission hid these accidents for twenty years to protect the nuclear power industry. Because these accidents where hidden, no one will know exactly how many people died because of these accidents. The state of California estimates 200.

Atomic Meltdown U.S.A. part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPk9kEaSyAY&feature=related

Atomic Meltdown U.S.A. part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGUZIAQ79eA&feature=related

Atomic Meltdown U.S.A. part 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Ik3ZZXMqWc&feature=related

[Nederland]

1. These accidents are just like Chernobyl

No containment structure. I know of no pro-nuke person that would advocate such a configuration.

It looks like the first two happened in 1957 and 1959--fairly early in the development of nuclear power. A third accident happened in 1971 though, which is inexcusable. By 1971 the US had no business running a reactor without a containment structure.

[NNadir]

3. Yes, but you are forgetting the salient point. We should ban cars because of the corvair, and dams

because well, the hundreds of thousands of deaths caused by them, and certainly dangerous fossil fuels because of situations like Karachi Harbor.

Oh wait. I missed something. Every alleged death caused by nuclear systems is worth paying infinite attention to, even if it comes at the expense of 6,000,000,000 deaths.

Why?

Because God says and as we all know anti-nukism is a irrefutably invaluable cult that cannot be questioned because anti-nukes spend all their time living in the 1950's.

Also, Elvis is the only musician who ever mattered, and Republican Presidents are great because Eisenhower was not a disaster.

Also, the Chevy Bel Air is the high point of human engineering and the only transportation system we will ever need is the interstate transit system.

You need to pay attention, lest you find yourself being distracted by the millions of gallons of carcinogenic oil now dripping all over the Gulf of Mexico while dumb twirps get paranoid about what happened in the 1950's.

[jpak]

4. Oyster Creek nuclear plant kills untold millions of marine organisms every day

way to go NJ

[NNadir]

14. Unlike dangerous fossil fuels? The number of anti-nukes who understand biology

is, um, zero.

I note that there is NOT ONE anti-nuke on this website who cares that the company that funds the illiterate anti-nuke (is there any other kind?) has covered a huge portion of the Gulf of Mexico with a patina of oil?

Why are there NO such anti-nukes? Because the anti-nuke industry is openly owned by the dangerous fossil fuel industry.

I note that the OP is written by a "biofuels will save us" freak who thinks that gasoline is great if you drop a little smidgen of pigshit in it. I note, with due contempt, that like every other anti-nuke, writer is oblivious to the external cost of um, pigs.

By contrast I know about the external costs of pigs: http://www.nnadir.dailykos.com/story/2008/7/4/222911/8640/354/546786">Life Cycle Analysis of Pigs in Sweden: An Environmental Breakdown.

Another external cost of pigs involves consumer pigs who, having never produced a single useful thing in their useless lives, smear pig shit all over sciences (for one example) they know nothing about.

Happily, most of the planet has rejected pigshit solutions to climate change, and the expansion of nuclear capacity is no longer deterred by the psychotic made up rantings of light weight anti-science anti-knowledge bloggers.

What Lincoln is alleged to have said more than a century ago is certainly relevant to the anti-nuke cults: "You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.

This statement applies to the efforts of the BP owned anti-nuke cults certainly, which is why so many nuclear phase outs are being phased out.

I happen to live in close proximity to Barnegat Bay, where, by the way, local elementary schools take children to observe sea life. Contrary to the stupid rantings of stupid people, the Bay is quite alive and contrary to stupid ravings of stupid people, it has not become sterile in the 40 years of operations of the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant, which produces more energy than the dangerous fossil fuel hellhole, Denmark, can produce in all of its "lipstick on a pig" wind plants.

The largest source of death to flora and fauna in Barnegat Bay is sewage run-off. This has been the subject of considerable research in the area by people called, um, "scientists."

The effect of dangerous fossil fuel powered boats is also a problem for larger organisms, often involving pollution anti-nukes couldn't care less about: Oil slicks.

But in yet another graphic display of vast ignorance coupled with astounding misinformation, the only think that anti-nukes think is responsible for any changes in Barnegat bay is a stupid fantasy about the nuclear power plant there.

As usual, the anti-nukes would prefer that the nuclear power plant be replaced by another evil and destructive dangerous fossil fuel plant, and since anti-nukes are blissfully unaware of the laws of thermodynamics, they will ignore any thermal effects from a dangerous fossil fuel plant.

You never, for instance, hear a comment from a dumb anti-nuke on this website about the cooling towers at the Drax coal plant. In their stupid imaginations, the only thermal effects are connected to nuclear power. Why? Because anti-nukes couldn't care less about Drax, because it's a coal plant.

Guess what? The world as a whole has decided that nuclear power need not be perfect to better than all the stuff that dumb dogmatists don't care about, the external costs of every form of energy. All nuclear power needs to do is to be better than everything else, which, by international consensus, it is.

How about we have some crybaby sulking about the Monju restart today, or the decision of China's last week to undertake the construction of at least four fast breeder reactors? How about a little whine about the fact that the fast reactor working group at the International Atomic Energy Agency has Germany and Italy as members and Belgium Sweden as observers, and, um, um, um, Belarus.

I guess the Beloruss couldn't care less that every dumb anti-nuke is here to claim that they are all dead from Chernobyl and don't exist.

Tough shit, the world couldn't care less what pig shits think.

Have a nice evening.

[kristopher]

15. It's the fossil fuel crowd that supports nuclear.

Associated Press/Stanford University Poll conducted by GfK Roper Public Affairs & Media. Nov. 17-29, 2009. N=1,005 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.1.

"In general, would you favor or oppose building more nuclear power plants at this time?"
Favor 49 Oppose 48 Unsure 3

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

CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll. Oct. 16-18, 2009. N=1,038 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.

“To address the country’s energy needs, would you support or oppose action by the federal government to ?” (Half Sample)

"Increase coal mining"
Support 52, Oppose 45, Unsure 3

"Build more nuclear power plants"
Support 52, Oppose 46, Unsure 2

"Increase oil and gas drilling"
Support 64, Oppose 33, Unsure 3

"Develop more solar and wind power"
Support 91, Oppose 8, Unsure 1

"Develop electric car technology"
Support 82, Oppose 17, Unsure 2

"Require more energy conservation by businesses and industries"
Support 78, Oppose 20, Unsure 2

"Require more energy conservation by consumers like yourself"
Support 73, Oppose 25, Unsure 3

"Require car manufacturers to improve the fuel-efficiency of vehicles sold in this country"
Support 85, Oppose 14, Unsure 1

Asked of those who support building more nuclear power plants:
"Would you favor or oppose building a nuclear power plant within 50 miles of your home?"
Favor 66, Oppose 33

[Fledermaus]

6. Nuclear power, unsafe at any speed.....I like that!

thanks

Strange, are you defending the car CULTure now?

[BeFree]

2. What...!?!?!?!

I was told, right here on DU, that no one ever died from nukes..?!?!?!

I guess what they meant was not in the last few minutes?

[wtmusic]

5. Well, there was the Great Plutonium Spill of 1889

What's that ya say, sonny? Plutonium didn't exist yet? I know there were more accidents at least 50 years ago that weren't documented well, caused millions of deaths, and were hushed up by the massive pro-nuclear, pro-radiation death lobby, but the details escape me right now...

[madokie]

8. Some of the earliest deaths that they don't claim but the people died nonetheless

was the Navajo uranium miners. Hell they are still fighting with them for compensation. How'd you like to know that your offspring going into the next few generations have all had gene mutations from your exposure to radiation while doing your job. A job that the people running the show knew damn well what the dangers were but didn't give a shit, hell its just a bunch of injuns who cares about them. I can just hear it in the board rooms now. Only fools and small minded people advocate for more nuclear energy.
I'm old enough to remember the conversations our neighbor and family friend, (a Manhattan project physicist) had with his friend my dad talking about the dangers of radiation and how they have to figure out how to deal with that before they can use this relatively new found source of energy. Lots of energy but it carries a lot of baggage, something to that effect is what our friend would say. He didn't hold out much hope that it all could be dealt with safely as there were a lot of questions still to be answered in that regard.
You see this isn't a concern thats just cropped up recently it's always been there. We studied the basics of nuclear energy in school, the dangers, how it would have a big impact on our lives, on our medical field. Before they were really advocating using it as a power source. Back when they were still building small reactors that they used for proof of concept etc, IIRC, back before they knew they had to lie to sell it to us. It would do some here some good to go back and brush up on some of that too.
You may not realize it but you are toeing the nuclear power industries line pretty tightly. Its all lies, smoke and mirrors. Pie in the sky thinking is what we call it.

[wtmusic]

11. There's no evidence that genetic mutation from radiation is inherited

It can and does cause cancers, and many of the people in the boardrooms died of exposure too - very little known about long-term exposure to radiation at the time.

But unless there is chromosomal damage to a sperm/egg or uranium is passed to a fetus in vitro, there is no chance of inheriting any legacy of radiation exposure.

Both are possible; there isn't any evidence to show it's happened.

[Fledermaus]

13. You think so?

It was proven a long time ago. 1926

Radiation causing mutations 1960
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLrMS_zs1kE&feature=related

[wtmusic]

16. Sorry, I didn't know you were a fruit fly.

If I was one, or a cob of corn, and got the holy shit irradiated out of me ( both probably saw more radiation than you will in your lifetime) I might be concerned.

Radiation causing mutations was never at issue. That's how cancer works.

Now as far as inherited genetic damage in homo sapiens (just because a parent grows a tumor, doesn't mean you'll get cancer too)...where were we again?

[Fledermaus]

17. n/t

n/t

[Fledermaus]

18. And how much radiation would that be.

Your post reads like you are using a dowsing rod to get your answers.

Do you think you could be a little more specific? How many units of what?

[Fledermaus]

9. Wow! You'll like this one too.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x246021

PS I changed the spelling of one word to completely change the meaning of the post. Can you find it.:loveya:

[wtmusic]

10. I guess I struck a nerve last time, I had forgotten about that

But now that you've reminded me I'll be sure to take everything you write with a grain of salt, it might be "edited" :rofl:

[bergie321]

7. How many died

At Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

[Massacure]

12. Who cares?

How many people died at Hamburg?
How many people died at Dresden?
How many people died at Tokyo?