Nuclear Lies

Posted: March 18, 2011 in ALL POSTS, News Rants
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

I am sick of hearing the apologists for the nuclear energy industry, who in my opinion are just a bunch of puppets for the current energy monarchy who run the oil, natural gas and nuclear companies.  I reject their assertion that using nuclear energy to supply our power is safe and here is why:

  • Estimates vary on how long spent fuel needs to be stored before it is safe, but they range from 10 to 20,000 years.  That means they have to be contained someplace for all of that time.   No civilization, let alone government,  has ever lasted close to that long,  in fact all of recorded human civilizations does not span 10,000 years,  so how can we reasonably expect future generations to even know  that these storage facilities exist, let alone the danger that lies therein.
  • During those thousands of years, our planet is likely to go through violent upheaval and there is no way to know if the places we store this stuff will remain stable for the next hundred, let alone the next ten thousand years.
  • Calling nuclear energy cheap is also a lie.  The cost of building the power plants so they will have the appearance of being safe is astronomical, and go well beyond any savings that might be incurred in operation.  With the same money  spent to build one nuclear power you could probably build ten solar to steam plants that never need fuel, never pollute (their emission is distilled water), and will not cause someone future person to be born with three legs.   And the Sun will always be there, at least as long as we are.

There is only one form of nuclear energy we should be using  —  fusion —  and we already have the engine for that — we orbit around it.  The lie that solar energy cannot supply ALL the power we need to run this whole world has been perpetrated by the captains of energy, simply because they cannot figure out a way to own the sun.  We use an infinitesimally small amount of the energy from the sun.  We NEED to tap into it but THEY don’t want us to.

Would it cost lots of money to build the solar infrastructure initially?  Yes, vast arrays of solar collectors — both passive and photo voltaic —  across the sun-belt in our country and other such places around the globe, would cost many billions of dollars.  Whenever a new technology is developed, the prototypes are expensive, but (with the exception of nuclear power) once the industry is under way, the price will come down.

Saying that we can’t have solar power because we don’t have the infrastructure, is just as short-sighted as the argument people made when electricity was first proposed as a power source.  The “experts” at that time spurred on by their handlers were all saying that it would just be too expensive to do this.  But, did we then not string the wires?

  1. worldtake says:

    Here is a link that supports my assertion that Solar energy is cheaper to produce than Nuclear energy.

  2. worldtake says:

    I know I am talking to myself here, but one more comment:
    I really think it should be a wake-up call for us due to the recent events in Japan. If those that were the most prepared in the world for such a disaster cannot handle it, how will the rest of us fare when the hammer falls?

  3. cslicer says:

    Mr WordTake: Why don’t you wait until March 2012 to determine the actual results. Or perhaps are you just against the nuclear power no matter what ?

  4. cslicer says:

    The US has no oil production running to influence the prices on the world market. Coal is coal & coal is filthy no matter how you dress it up.

    The US has all the natural gas we will ever need for the next 100 years & beyond but EPA would allow it to process.

    You would rather see a child go cold than do something with in reason. Sir.

    • worldtake says:

      Uh yes, I thought I made that clear. Please comment on how we can adequately safeguard future generations and if you would, focus on my points about human history an its obvious lack of stability therein. And please comment on your opinon as to the likelihood of even greater instability in the future as a result of increasing population and shrinking resources.
      Yes, if the EPA would allow us to go ahead and hydrofrack all the natural gas out of our rock, we could get that natural gas. And large portions of our country would make the areas devastated by strip-mining in Pennsylvania during the mid-twentieth century look like Central Park. The upside would be that many people could roast marshmallows by igniting their water faucets.

  5. khoan says:

    no fussion power = no means to explore space = trapped on Earth waiting to be killed by Sun exploding or asteroid smashing Earth = no future = no prospect = no hope

    so why do we bother to do anything, when, eventually, everything will just die with the Sun’s death?

  6. […] Reincarnated“,  I make a short comment on the ravings of Ann Coulter.  In “Nuclear Lies“, I argue that no matter what we do with this form of power, it will never be safe.  For the […]

Please tell me what you Think. I won't know unless you comment.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s