|
15 March 2011 By Stephen
Lendman For years, Helen Caldicott warned
it's coming. In her 1978 book, "Nuclear Madness," she
said: "As a physician, I contend that
nuclear technology threatens life on our planet with
extinction. If present trends continue, the air we
breathe, the food we eat, and the water we drink will
soon be contaminated with enough radioactive
pollutants to pose a potential health hazard far
greater than any plague humanity has ever
experienced." More below on the inevitable
dangers from commercial nuclear power proliferation,
besides added military ones. On March 11, New York Times
writer Martin Fackler headlined, "Powerful Quake and
Tsunami Devastate Northern Japan," saying: "The 8.9-magnitude earthquake
(Japan's strongest ever) set off a devastating tsunami
that sent walls of water (six meters high) washing
over coastal cities in the north." According to
Japan's Meteorological Survey, it was 9.0. The Sendai port city and other
areas experienced heavy damage. "Thousands of homes
were destroyed, many roads were impassable, trains and
buses (stopped) running, and power and cellphones
remained down. On Saturday morning, the JR rail
company" reported three trains missing. Many
passengers are unaccounted for. Striking at 2:46PM Tokyo time, it
caused vast destruction, shook city skyscrapers,
buckled highways, ignited fires, terrified millions,
annihilated areas near Sendai, possibly killed
thousands, and caused a nuclear meltdown, its
potential catastrophic effects far exceeding quake and
tsunami devastation, almost minor by comparison under
a worst case scenario. On March 12, Times writer Matthew
Wald headlined, "Explosion Seen at Damaged Japan
Nuclear Plant," saying: "Japanese officials (ordered
evacuations) for people living near two nuclear power
plants whose cooling systems broke down," releasing
radioactive material, perhaps in far greater amounts
than reported. NHK television and Jiji said the
40-year old Fukushima plant's outer structure housing
the reactor "appeared to have blown off, which could
suggest the containment building had already been
breached." Japan's nuclear regulating agency said
radioactive levels inside were 1,000 times above
normal. Reuters said the 1995 Kobe quake
caused $100 billion in damage, up to then the most
costly ever natural disaster. This time, from quake
and tsunami damage alone, that figure will be dwarfed.
Moreover, under a worst case core meltdown, all bets
are off as the entire region and beyond will be
threatened with permanent contamination, making the
most affected areas unsafe to live in. On March 12, Stratfor Global
Intelligence issued a "Red Alert: Nuclear Meltdown at
Quake-Damaged Japanese Plant," saying: Fukushima Daiichi "nuclear power
plant in Okuma, Japan, appears to have caused a
reactor meltdown." Stratfor downplayed its
seriousness, adding that such an event "does not
necessarily mean a nuclear disaster," that already may
have happened - the ultimate nightmare short of
nuclear winter. According to Stratfor, "(A)s long
as the reactor core, which is specifically designed to
contain high levels of heat, pressure and radiation,
remains intact, the melted fuel can be dealt with. If
the (core's) breached but the containment facility
built around (it) remains intact, the melted fuel can
be....entombed within specialized concrete" as at
Chernobyl in 1986. In fact, that disaster killed
nearly one million people worldwide from nuclear
radiation exposure. In their book titled, "Chernobyl:
Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the
Environment," Alexey Yablokov, Vassily Nesterenko and
Alexey Nesterenko said: "For the past 23 years, it has
been clear that there is a danger greater than nuclear
weapons concealed within nuclear power. Emissions from
this one reactor exceeded a hundred-fold the
radioactive contamination of the bombs dropped on
Hiroshima and Nagasaki." "No citizen of any country can be
assured that he or she can be protected from
radioactive contamination. One nuclear reactor can
pollute half the globe. Chernobyl fallout covers the
entire Northern Hemisphere." Stratfor explained that if
Fukushima's floor cracked, "it is highly likely that
the melting fuel will burn through (its) containment
system and enter the ground. This has never happened
before," at least not reported. If now occurring,
"containment goes from being merely dangerous, time
consuming and expensive to nearly impossible," making
the quake, aftershocks, and tsunamis seem mild by
comparison. Potentially, millions of lives will be
jeopardized. Japanese officials said
Fukushima's reactor container wasn't breached.
Stratfor and others said it was, making the potential
calamity far worse than reported. Japan's Nuclear and
Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) said the explosion at
Fukushima's Saiichi No. 1 facility could only have
been caused by a core meltdown. In fact, 3 or more
reactors are affected or at risk. Events are fluid and
developing, but remain very serious. The possibility
of an extreme catastrophe can't be discounted. Moreover, independent nuclear
safety analyst John Large told Al Jazeera that by
venting radioactive steam from the inner reactor to
the outer dome, a reaction may have occurred, causing
the explosion. "When I look at the size of the
explosion," he said, "it is my opinion that there
could be a very large leak (because) fuel continues to
generate heat." Already, Fukushima way exceeds
Three Mile Island that experienced a partial core
meltdown in Unit 2. Finally it was brought under
control, but coverup and denial concealed full details
until much later. According to anti-nuclear
activist Harvey Wasserman, Japan's quake fallout may
cause nuclear disaster, saying: "This is a very serious
situation. If the cooling system fails (apparently it
has at two or more plants), the super-heated
radioactive fuel rods will melt, and (if so) you could
conceivably have an explosion," that, in fact,
occurred. As a result, massive radiation
releases may follow, impacting the entire region. "It
could be, literally, an apocalyptic event. The reactor
could blow." If so, Russia, China, Korea and most
parts of Western Asia will be affected. Many thousands
will die, potentially millions under a worse case
scenario, including far outside East Asia. Moreover, at least five reactors
are at risk. Already, a 20-mile wide radius was
evacuated. What happened in Japan can occur anywhere.
Yet Obama's proposed budget includes $36 billion for
new reactors, a shocking disregard for global safety. Calling Fukushima an "apocalyptic
event," Wasserman said "(t)hese nuclear plants have to
be shut," let alone budget billions for new ones. It's
unthinkable, he said. If a similar disaster struck
California, nuclear fallout would affect all America,
Canada, Mexico, Central America, and parts of South
America. Nuclear expert Helen Caldicott agrees, telling this writer by phone that a potential regional catastrophe is unfolding. Over 30 years ago, she warned of its inevitability. Her 2006 book titled, "Nuclear Power is Not the Answer" explained that contrary to government and industry propaganda, even during normal operations, nuclear power generation causes significant discharges of greenhouse gas emissions, as well as hundreds of thousands of curies of deadly radioactive gases and other radioactive elements into the environment every year. Moreover, nuclear plants are atom bomb factories. A 1000 megawatt reactor produces 500 pounds of plutonium annually. Only 10 are needed for a bomb able to devastate a large city, besides causing permanent radiation contamination. Nuclear Power not Cleaner and Greener Just the opposite, in fact. Although a nuclear power plant releases no carbon dioxide (CO2), the primary greenhouse gas, a vast infrastructure is required. Called the nuclear fuel cycle, it uses large amounts of fossil fuels. Each cycle stage exacerbates the problem, starting with the enormous cost of mining and milling uranium, needing fossil fuel to do it. How then to dispose of mill tailings, produced in the extraction process. It requires great amounts of greenhouse emitting fuels to remediate. Moreover, other nuclear cycle steps also use fossil fuels, including converting uranium to hexafluoride gas prior to enrichment, the enrichment process itself, and conversion of enriched uranium hexafluoride gas to fuel pellets. In addition, nuclear power plant construction, dismantling and cleanup at the end of their useful life require large amounts of energy. There's more, including contaminated cooling water, nuclear waste, its handling, transportation and disposal/storage, problems so far unresolved. Moreover, nuclear power costs and risks are so enormous that the industry couldn't exist without billions of government subsidized funding annually. The Unaddressed Human Toll from Normal Operations Affected are uranium miners, industry workers, and potentially everyone living close to nuclear reactors that routinely emit harmful radioactive releases daily, harming human health over time, causing illness and early death. The link between radiation exposure and disease is irrefutable, depending only on the amount of cumulative exposure over time, Caldicott saying: "If a regulatory gene is biochemically altered by radiation exposure, the cell will begin to incubate cancer, during a 'latent period of carcinogenesis,' lasting from two to sixty years." In fact, a single gene mutation can prove fatal. No amount of radiation exposure is safe. Moreover, when combined with about 80,000 commonly used toxic chemicals and contaminated GMO foods and ingredients, it causes 80% of known cancers, putting everyone at risk everywhere. Further, the combined effects of allowable radiation exposure, uranium mining, milling operations, enrichment, and fuel fabrication can be devastating to those exposed. Besides the insoluble waste storage/disposal problem, nuclear accidents happen and catastrophic ones are inevitable. Inevitable Meltdowns Caldicott and other experts agree they're certain in one or more of the hundreds of reactors operating globally, many years after their scheduled shutdown dates unsafely. Combined with human error, imprudently minimizing operating costs, internal sabotage, or the effects of a high-magnitude quake and/or tsunami, an eventual catastrophe is certain. Aging plants alone, like Japan's Fukushima facility, pose unacceptable risks based on their record of near-misses and meltdowns, resulting from human error, old equipment, shoddy maintenance, and poor regulatory oversight. However, under optimum operating conditions, all nuclear plants are unsafe. Like any machine or facility, they're vulnerable to breakdowns, that if serious enough can cause enormous, possibly catastrophic, harm. Add nuclear war to the mix, also potentially inevitable according to some experts, by accident or intent, including Steven Starr saying: "Only a single failure of nuclear deterrence is required to start a nuclear war," the consequences of which "would be profound, potentially killing "tens of millions of people, and caus(ing) long-term, catastrophic disruptions of the global climate and massive destruction of Earth's protective ozone layer. The result would be a global nuclear famine that could kill up to one billion people." Worse still is nuclear winter, the ultimate nightmare, able to end all life if it happens. It's nuclear proliferation's unacceptable risk, a clear and present danger as long as nuclear weapons and commercial dependency exist.In 1946, Enstein knew it, saying: "Our world faces a crisis as yet unperceived by those possessing the power to make great decisions for good and evil. The unleashed power of the atom has changed everything save our modes of thinking, and thus we drift toward unparalleled catastrophe." He envisioned two choices - abolish all forms of nuclear power or face extinction. No one listened. The Doomsday Clock keeps ticking.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening. http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/. |
Add Comments