US PIRG Says Nuclear Power Is Not Work The Risk

US PIRG Says Nuclear Power Is Not Work The Risk

www.jorbit.com

The United States Public Interest Research Group Tuesday issued a report which they said demonstrates that American nuclear power plants are not immune to the types of natural disasters, mechanical failures, human errors and losses of power supplies that have characterized Fukushima and other nuclear accidents

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.jorbit.com

We can design plants that can address, prevent or manage individual threats, but when multiple challenges hit simultaneously such as what is going on in Japan, or when one challenge cascades into another in unpredictable ways, this can lead to catastrophe,” she said.

then what is the value of human life near nuclear plants ?think and act.

www.jorbit.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Ugg, ok who here is willing to volunteer as one of the ones who's power gets shut off for months until they build more coal plants? Anyone?

Deebo

Originally posted by Deebo
Ugg, ok who here is willing to volunteer as one of the ones who's power gets shut off for months until they build more coal plants? Anyone?

Deebo

Thank you for so clearly demonstrating the challenges we as Americans would all have in any attempt to evolve with the knowledge and experience we acquire. Beautiful!

It's time to stop playing around, and get on with developing vacuum (quantum foam) energy.

Originally posted by chasingbrahman

Originally posted by Deebo
Ugg, ok who here is willing to volunteer as one of the ones who's power gets shut off for months until they build more coal plants? Anyone?

Deebo

Thank you for so clearly demonstrating the challenges we as Americans would all have in any attempt to evolve with the knowledge and experience we acquire. Beautiful!

Nuclear power plant disasters are extremely rare, and Japan's were not up to standard. Generators were in the wrong place, etc. They are safe if constructed the right way. Id like to see the economy and country function, businesses, etc if a huge percentage of the grid was suddenly lost. I agree to build failsafe alternatives, but build them first, then shut down the nuclear facilities.

Deebo

Okey, if nuclear power is so dangerous, why does france get most of their power ( I think it's like 78% from nukes?) from nuclear power plants. Don't remember hearing anything about any problems there.
I knew soon as this problem happened in Japan that everyone would jump on the "nuclear is evil bandwagon". What people keep forgetting 1) is that japan power plant is over forty years old and was designed to take an 8.2 quake I think. 2) that it's still actually standing after a 8.9/9.0 quake that's pretty good.
Yes, I realise that the core may be leaking. It's bad, I know.
Guess what I'm trying to say is we're going to have to do something and nuclear power seems to be the best way to go at the moment, buy France's plans for their power plants and beef them up if needed, unless we the US want to start building more coal an oil (which means obama your going to have to approve drilling for (gasp) oil) burning power plants and we know how the environuts feel about that. Solar there is no way that you'll ever be able to collect enough sun to power thousand/millions of homes and industry. Wind? The enviro people here in NY are already complaneing(sp?) that the windmills are killing birds, messing with their flight paths, scarring them, affecting weather patterns are noisy, ect. and again same not enough power to supply population.

Originally posted by Deebo
Ugg, ok who here is willing to volunteer as one of the ones who's power gets shut off for months until they build more coal plants? Anyone?

Deebo

Make it years, not months to buildnew power plants.

Then there is the mass starvation as the effects of no power cacade through the nations economy.

Which takes you to their real agenda - depopulation.

Research the threads on ATS about using thorium in reactors instead of uranium/plutonium.

Amazing stuff.

Using thorium: cheaper, less radiation, radiation doesn't last as long, power plants smaller and cheaper to build, can't use spent fuel for weapons, etc. etc.

Why didn't we go that way in the past?

U.S. and other governments purposely chose uranium/plutonium designs to get the weapons grade by-products.

reply to post by usanews


What a surprise. I didnt see this coming.

Funny how none of the other issues we have had with nuclear have led us to this conclusion, but suddenly a problem in some reactors in Japan, (which are built on a very active fault line and actually survived the quake intact and in fact it was the tsunami that caused the problem) has made the whole idea of nuclear energy unfeasible.

No, you could not just build them inland, away from fault zones, pffft. Dont be silly. The whole idea is totally no good anymore.


This has something to do with something else. Perhaps the PTB are trying to ensure that there is no source for the masses to make homemade nuclear weapons when they start shoving their boot down our throat? Whatever it is, I promise you the motive behind this is not the safety of the people.

Edit to add, I actually do bet it has to do with eliminating as many possible sources of anything that can be used to fight realistically against huge standing armies as rebels.

reply to post by usanews


Not impressed. The USPIRG is a George Soros funded, far left agenda driven "advocacy" group. Anything they say is suspect.

discoverthenetworks.org...


Also your coy separation of US from PIRG implies it is an actual US agency when nothing could be further from the truth amounts to a covert lie.

Lets turn up the fear level,

chicago.cbslocal.com...

The threats came in the mail and to date, there have been 25 letters that warn of nuclear bombs destroying America.