Poll: Few confident US ready for nuclear emergency (AP) (via US General News)

Most of America’s nuclear preparedness is based on obscene accumulations of pro nuclear propaganda and assurances that nothing bad can happen. That’s not enough.

There is simply too much profit, too many billions of dollars of influence and power to make any individual looking at the situation comfortable with the pronouncements of government and industry.

It is always the same.

We are told –
1. It can’t happen.
2. The situation is not serious.
3. Nothing like this has every happened before.
4. Radiation is not that big a deal – (at this point there must be discussion of chest x-rays)
5. The situation is under control.
6. The problem here is not the situation which is under control but the panicked response of a population not properly informed about the minimal danger of radiation.
7. That reactor was an obsolescent design.
8. Our new reactors have solved these problems.
9. Nuclear power is necessary. We cannot produce enough electricity without it.
10. Critics of nuclear power are alarmists, misinformed, treehuggers, radicals, rabble rousers, anti-industry, anti-corporate activists, etc.
11. What do you want us to do? Go back to living in the stone age!!

If you want to add some more, please do.

James Pilant

WASHINGTON – Most Americans doubt the U.S. government is prepared to respond to a nuclear emergency like the one in Japan, a new Associated Press-GfK poll shows. But it also shows few Americans believe such an emergency would occur. Nevertheless, the disaster has turned more Americans against new nuclear power plants. The poll found that 60 percent of Americans oppose building more nuclear power plants. That’s up from 48 percent who opposed it in … Read More

via US General News

NUCLEAR CRISIS – U.S. HEALTH CARE UNPREPARED (via INFOQUANDO)

I thought I was going to read a brief analysis of American shortcomings in regard to nuclear disaster preparedness. What I got was a lengthy detailed report dealing with the problem from many different angles.

I recommend the post.

James Pilant

NUCLEAR CRISIS - U.S. HEALTH CARE UNPREPARED U.S. Health Care System Unprepared for Major Nuclear Emergency A Los Angeles police officer in a hazard suit keeps watch in a “hazardous material hot area” after the explosion of a “dirty bomb” during a simulated attack at a Port of Los Angeles dock on Aug. 5, 2004. (David McNew/Getty Images) by Sheri Fink, Special to ProPublica U.S. officials say the nation’s health system is ill-prepared to cope with a catastrophic release of radiation, despite … Read More

via INFOQUANDO

IEMA Finds Trace Amounts of Radiation in Metro-East (via CBS St. Louis)

This is alarming. Still it is within currently recognized standards of safety.

James Pilant

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (KMOX) – Trace amounts of radioactive iodine has been found in air, grass, milk and rainwater samples in the Metro-East. The Illinois Emergency Management Agency said Friday the radiation found in Madison, Clinton and Bond Counties in Illinois is from the Fukushima nuclear power plants in Japan. However the agency stresses that these findings are still far below established limits and present no health hazard to citizens in Illi … Read More

via CBS St. Louis

Atomic Energy Regulatory Committee Constructive Criticism (via ideainvestmentinnovation)

A very reasonable, measured analysis of the crisis and its likely effects on future regulation.

Impressive.

James Pilant

Recent events have put a spotlight on the World’s nuclear engineering board and the safety mechanisms that have been instituted since the incident at Chernobyl. There seems to be one missing piece to the puzzle. There are world standards that demand all nuclear facilities to have multiple safety mechanisms in place. Such as in Japan’s case with the first mechanism being shock sensors that immediately pushed steel rods in-between the enriched uran … Read More

via ideainvestmentinnovation

Are Nuclear-Powered Plants Safer Than Those Powered by Coal? (via Beneath the Oaks)

Courtesy of Bethesday Software

I have discussed before the nuclear industries fascination with actual death tolls. When it comes to the actual death rate, nuclear power wins the debate over what is the best means of producing electricity.

Unfortunately, there are 10,800 square miles of land near Chernobyl no one can visit for more than some few hours and the families near the Fukushima plant will probably never be able to go home. You cannot measure the safety of one form of energy over another based purely on directly cause deaths. It is only one factor.

It is the difference between one sided, intellectually bankrupt propaganda and intelligent understanding.

James Pilant

I knew the nuclear apologists would get around to making this argument sooner or later, and sure enough, The Washington Post published a thoughtful and well-researched article by David Brown on April 2, 2011, entitled, “Nuclear power is the safest way to make electricity, according to study.” Brown made a good case for the overall safety of nuclear power plants as far as the workers are concerned. Coal-fired plants are responsible for five times … Read More

via Beneath the Oaks

Radiation Levels on the Rise (via Poison Your Mind)

Fukushima

A good take on yesterday’s news about the continuing massive leak at the Japanese nuclear facility. I wish these current events could be followed by more Americans.

It’s a nice blog. It would pay to look at some of the other posts there.

James Pilant

Even bearing this data on radiation exposure in mind, it’s hard to see how today’s news isn’t pretty terrifying. We don’t seem to know exactly what’s going on in these reactors, much less how to stop it, or where the dangerous material is going.  The operator of Japan’s stricken Fukushima nuclear plant said Tuesday that it had found radioactive iodine at 7.5 million times the legal limit in a seawater sample taken near the facility, and governmen … Read More

via Poison Your Mind

Fukushima Info Part 2 Updated April 5 (via TrueNorthist)

TrueNorthist has a daily update on the Japanese ongoing nuclear disaster. I appreciate those elements of the blogosphere that have not grown bored or moved on from the issue. The crisis produces new horrors every few days and these are literally history making events.

James Pilant

Fukushima Info Part 2  Updated April 5 This is a continuation of my previous Fukushima info post.  Links and comments continue below.  As always, feel free to discuss the event in the comments.  Approval may take a while, but I check frequently.  I run on Pacific Daylight Time which is GMT -8, I think!  Updates will be added to the end of the page and separated by a horizontal line.  This post will be bumped to the top every morning. Press Release (Apr 01,2011) Plant Status of Fukushi … Read More

via TrueNorthist

Dangers, Properties, possible Uses and Methods of Purification of radioactively contaminated (drinking) Water (e.g. in Japan) (via CrisisMaven’s Blog)

CrisisMaven assures me that this is useful information for dealing with contaminated drinking water. So, I pass it on.

James Pilant

Most methods and tools being recommended here on the Internet such as purification by filtration will not lead to your desired result of decontaminating “radioactive water”. a) Radioactive contamination of drinking water in Japan at this point in time can come about in only two ways: 1) The source is actual surface water like lakes or rivers, possibly filtrated through river banks and thus came into contact with e.g. radioactive rain and/or dust. … Read More

via CrisisMaven’s Blog

Andrew Comments On My Post: “Could science prove that vanilla is better than chocolate? (via No Right to Believe)”

Andrew has some comment concerning my blog post: “Could science prove that vanilla is better than chocolate? (via No Right to Believe)”

Here are Andrew’s thoughts –

I disagree with Mr. Harris. Science was designed to be descriptive, not prescriptive. In other words, science is meant to describe how things are or how they appear to be. Not how things ought to be.

The scientific method could be used to examine how and why different cultures end up with their specific philosophical values systems. It is not equipped, however, to determine which system is “better” and which ought to be followed.

Sam Harris and the other founders of the New Atheist Movement (NAM) have been trying, for the past few years, to make science into more than what it is. They’ve put it up on a pedestal and seem to be almost worshiping the idea of science as this perfect process for the attainment of knowledge and reason. They’ve run into a few roadblocks, however, when trying to reconcile the notion of morality and “what we OUGHT to do” with the scientific method that they worship. The funny part is, by doing this they fall into the very same philosophical traps that they accuse the followers of religious philosophies and doctrines of doing.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m an atheist as well (not as militant as the NAM though), and I am very familiar with a few areas of science (mainly physics and mechanics) so I know how good of a tool science can be at helping us further our understanding of the universe we live in. Having said that, however, let me emphasis that it does have its limits.

A good example of this is in the topic of nuclear weapons. Science helped us understand how to build the atom bomb. The ethics behind building and using such a weapon, however, is a completely different ball game. As such, we can see that there is more to being human than what science can help us see.

Whether or not science has moral answers I will leave to my readers’ discretion. I am still struggling with the history and basic tenets of moral philosophy. Isn’t John Wayne supposed to have said, “A man’s got to know his limitations.” I try to not in over may head although I’m sure I do at times.

James Pilant

Why Moral Philosophers Aren’t More Moral Than the Rest of Us (via Ockham’s Beard)

Courtesy of Wiki Commons

This is a fun article. Of course, as an ethics teacher I should probably worry, but I will continue to have faith that I will do okay.

I am still working my way through moral philosophy so this article had relevance for me. I hope you enjoy it as well. Read the comments, some of them are pretty fire breathing.

James Pilant

Brace yourself. Or sit down. Or both. Eric Schwitzgebel and compatriots have uncovered a startling revelation: professional ethicists don’t behave any more morally or courteously than non-ethicists. Full abstract of their paper: If philosophical moral reflection tends to promote moral behavior, one might think that professional ethicists would behave morally better than do socially comparable non-ethicists.  We examined three types of courteous a … Read More

via Ockham’s Beard