Dear Bill:
As a fan of yours for decades, have to admit my deep sadness at hearing you endorse nukes as a part of the solution for Global Warming. The only conclusion/excuse I can come to, is that you have bought into the industry's $100's of million dollar propaganda campaign, without doing due diligence when it comes to doing your research on the topic. Just a few points for your consideration:
1. America's aging fleet of 103 reactors are not safe. Failing/breaking welds even in the reactor cores themselves, leaking spent fuel pools at most sites top the list.
2. Many reactors now have unknown/un-traceable leaks that are leaking tritium into the environment, where it is slowly finding its way into our drinking water supplies. Some reactors (such as Indian Point) are also leaking strontium 90, a known cancer precursor that finds its way into the human skeletal system.
3. The evacuation plans in the case of a major incident at a nuclear incident will not work, and without building adequate sheltering facilities, the concept of sheltering us in place in our homes will not work...this is especially true in the Northeast if the incident occurs during the winter months.
4. The Achilles Heel of American reactors in the case of a terrorist attack are the water intake systems, which in almost every attack could be severely compromised without having to go through plant security.
(http://greennuclearbutterfly.blogspot.com/2007/04/how-vulnerable-is-indian-point-are-we.html )
5. The licensing renewal application process has been rigged, as the DOE, NERAC, NRC and the nuclear industry decided back in the late 90's that the only way forward to a nuclear renaissance, was to keep everyone of our current reactors operating at full capacity through 2050 while the new generation (AP1000) reactors were being brought online...with all due respect, our government should not pave the way into a nuclear tomorrow by playing Russian Roulette with host communities health and safety.
6. Why has the NRC refused to do studies that measure the contributions to global warming that water discharge from nuclear reactors play? As one example, Indian Point daily discharges 2.4 BILLION gallons of 100 degree water into the Hudson River.
Lastly, if nuclear reactors are so safe, why can't we get insurance coverage for our losses in the case of a major incident, while the Price Anderson Act shields reactor owners from financial liability? It is my sincere hope, that you will do more research into this issue, and reverse your position on supporting the nuclear industry's rancid agenda...we do not need yet another Patrick Moore playing the part of Judas in this important fight.
Sherwood Martinelli
AKA Royce Penstinger-publisher of Green Nuclear Butterfly
As a fan of yours for decades, have to admit my deep sadness at hearing you endorse nukes as a part of the solution for Global Warming. The only conclusion/excuse I can come to, is that you have bought into the industry's $100's of million dollar propaganda campaign, without doing due diligence when it comes to doing your research on the topic. Just a few points for your consideration:
1. America's aging fleet of 103 reactors are not safe. Failing/breaking welds even in the reactor cores themselves, leaking spent fuel pools at most sites top the list.
2. Many reactors now have unknown/un-traceable leaks that are leaking tritium into the environment, where it is slowly finding its way into our drinking water supplies. Some reactors (such as Indian Point) are also leaking strontium 90, a known cancer precursor that finds its way into the human skeletal system.
3. The evacuation plans in the case of a major incident at a nuclear incident will not work, and without building adequate sheltering facilities, the concept of sheltering us in place in our homes will not work...this is especially true in the Northeast if the incident occurs during the winter months.
4. The Achilles Heel of American reactors in the case of a terrorist attack are the water intake systems, which in almost every attack could be severely compromised without having to go through plant security.
(http://greennuclearbutterfly.blogspot.com/2007/04/how-vulnerable-is-indian-point-are-we.html )
5. The licensing renewal application process has been rigged, as the DOE, NERAC, NRC and the nuclear industry decided back in the late 90's that the only way forward to a nuclear renaissance, was to keep everyone of our current reactors operating at full capacity through 2050 while the new generation (AP1000) reactors were being brought online...with all due respect, our government should not pave the way into a nuclear tomorrow by playing Russian Roulette with host communities health and safety.
6. Why has the NRC refused to do studies that measure the contributions to global warming that water discharge from nuclear reactors play? As one example, Indian Point daily discharges 2.4 BILLION gallons of 100 degree water into the Hudson River.
Lastly, if nuclear reactors are so safe, why can't we get insurance coverage for our losses in the case of a major incident, while the Price Anderson Act shields reactor owners from financial liability? It is my sincere hope, that you will do more research into this issue, and reverse your position on supporting the nuclear industry's rancid agenda...we do not need yet another Patrick Moore playing the part of Judas in this important fight.
Sherwood Martinelli
AKA Royce Penstinger-publisher of Green Nuclear Butterfly
Co-Signers
Susan Corbett
Conservation Chair,
SC Sierra Club
No comments:
Post a Comment