It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(visit the link for the full news article)
Following Fukushima, many people turned their back on nuclear power. Governments, such as Germany’s, decided to halt plans for new stations or phase out existing ones. Critics were happy to say the disaster proved what they’d been saying all along: Nuclear is too dangerous, and we don’t need it.
Because nuclear power is an abundant, low-carbon source of base-load power, it could make a large contribution to mitigation of global climate change and air pollution.
Originally posted by burntheships
reply to post by Iwinder
Ah, I guess they did not address any aspect of affordability there,
now that would really shed some light onto the farce the study is.
Granted, its co author being Nasa scientist turned climate activist James Hansen I could have almost
predicted the "outcome". And let me just say, I am all for conservation, and being
good stewards of the earth within reason, I find this study preposterous!
Thanks for the chuckle Iwinder, and your comments.
You are welcome and thanks for posting a great thread, after reading the link above about James Hansen I begin to question my common sense in this matter.
What are your personal thoughts on James and the press he seems to attract?
Regards, Iwinder
Originally posted by burntheships
reply to post by Iwinder
Well, in some aspects in his previous research regarding "pollution", I might agree
with him. I am all for advancement in "genuine clean energy, more efficient use of
the resources we have, and being a good steward.
However, this study really seems to point to serving and agenda,
suprisingly so, especially in that it seems to ignore the environmental
impact Chernobyl had, and I can only imagine how the will
sweep Fukushima under the proverbial rug.
This is eye opening to say the least...
Originally posted by burntheships
reply to post by peashooter
Natural gas is clean comparatively speaking ...
as opposed to coal or oil.
Solar is a good alternative, even so with all of the improvements
we will be burning fossill fuels for sometime to come. ....
German solar power plants produced a record 22 gigawatts of electricity - equal to 20 nuclear power stations at full capacity,
Originally posted by burntheships
One is really left wondering about the truthfullness
of this study, as they conclude that even Chernobyl
being the worst nuclear accident in history only caused about 40 deaths,
only 15 from cancer.
While those of us who read up on alternative news site
wont be buying this, as we have a vast knowledge
of Fukushima due to the thread here:
Japan delcares nuclear emergency after quake
...as compared to those who just listen to the MSM news and print.
Originally posted by XPLodER
it would look to me like they forgot to factor in the waste products,