How a nuclear attack on North Korea would add to global cancer epidemic

How a nuclear attack on North Korea would add to global cancer epidemic
A hill near Fukushima, Japan, that in April 2016 has been denuded by efforts at radiation decontamination following the nuclear power plant meltdown there in 2011. Credit: Andrew Marks, CC BY-SA

With tensions high between the United States and North Korea, there is the possibility that the U.S. would launch a "tactical" nuclear strike in the Korean peninsula. There would be consequences far beyond damage to military sites proposed in such an attack.

There is, of course, the danger that North Korea would retaliate and that tensions would escalate. That's serious political fallout. As a physician scientist who has has worked with radiation for more than 30 years, I am also concerned about a epidemic that would result from such an attack's nuclear fallout.

Even without a nuclear war, the incidence of cancer is already rising around the world, up by 33 percent worldwide in the past decade. This is largely due to aging of the population and environmental and behavioral patterns such as cigarette smoking. The last thing we need is more of this dreadful disease.

In my research laboratory, we use extremely small doses of radiation to image very small molecules in order to understand how the body works. All of us who work with radiation know about the lethal effects of large doses, but the radiation exposure to the scientists in my laboratory is monitored very closely. Strict federal guidelines define how much radiation is considered "safe."

During early morning walks in Seoul last year, while on sabbatical at Yonsei University, I could sense the city's vulnerability as I heard target practice from the top of nearby hills. Seoul, with a population of 22 million, is a mere 35 miles from the North Korean border and would be affected by nuclear fallout. Indeed, it is a medical likelihood that cancer rates in Seoul and the Korean peninsula would be increased for decades following a nuclear attack.

How nuclear fallout causes cancer

Nuclear fallout occurs when the debris from a nuclear bomb explosion rises up in the familiar mushroom cloud into the atmosphere and is then dispersed by winds over a large area. Much of what we know scientifically about nuclear fallout comes from testing nuclear bombs in remote areas, such as the Marshall Islands in the Pacific in the 1950s, where high exposures resulted in increased in colon and stomach cancers. We have also learned about the effects of nuclear fallout from cancers that occurred years after the U.S. bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and from cancers diagnosed after nuclear plant meltdowns at Chernobyl and Fukushima.

High doses of radiation can cause cancer by damaging DNA, the carrier of the genetic code. The damage to DNA caused by radiation is magnified in children because they are growing, and thus their DNA is dividing faster.

It takes years for most types of radiation-induced cancer to develop, and we might not know the full toll for decades. One long-term study found that about 5 percent of solid cancer cases were attributable to radiation. And for those people who were exposed to high doses of radiation (>1 gray, or about 1,000 chest x-rays), as much as 48 percent of solid tumors in survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were attributable to .

Because radioactive iodine released during nuclear power plant accidents is taken up by the thyroid gland, increased incidences of have been observed, for example, after the Chernobyl meltdown. Indeed, the Chernobyl meltdown in 1986 has caused an approximately 30 percent increase in thyroid cancer. And, Fukushima prefecture residents are already exhibiting increased rates of thyroid cancer seven years after the radiation exposure there.

Epidemiological data collected following the nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki have documented that over the past 70 years the incidence of both solid tumors and leukemias have been increased by about 10 percent among survivors.

How a nuclear attack on North Korea would add to global cancer epidemic
Bags filled with radioactively contaminated soil from the Fukushima nuclear plant meltdown in 2011 are piled high near Fukushima, Japan, in April 2016. Credit: Andrew Marks, CC BY-SA

One of the fallacies of tactical nuclear bombs is that they will be delivered such that they explode deep underground, limiting the nuclear fallout and its effects on humans. However, the best evidence suggests that the ability of these bombs to penetrate deeply below the surface is limited, and significant fallout will occur.

Scary prospects

The radiation exposure from a nuclear attack on North Korea is difficult to predict, but based on what is known from atmospheric nuclear testing from 1945 to 1980, there would be significant radioactive contamination due to dispersal of radioactive debris high into the atmosphere. This would ensure that a nuclear bomb explosion would result in worldwide radioactive contamination.

The tactical nuclear weapons that could be used for an attack on North Korea are up to 20 times the size of the bomb used in Hiroshima.

In Korea and surrounding areas subjected to the most intense , the radiation dose to humans may well be higher than that experienced by the 200,000 or so Japanese living near the Fukushima nuclear plant which suffered an earthquake- and tsunami-induced meltdown in 2011.

US troops and citizens in South Korea vulnerable

Any nuclear strike will result in local contamination. However, it will be impossible to completely clean up the radiation from the soil and water in the region, as has been proven in Fukushima where radioactive soil is now contained in thousands of large plastic bags piled high throughout the region. Our troops and more than 230,000 U.S. civilians who live in South Korea would be at risk.

Despite this attempt at decontamination by scraping the surface layer of contaminated soil and putting it into plastic bags, the ambient radiation exposure in the Fukushima region remains elevated above limits considered safe for laboratory workers here in the U.S.

Moreover, streams and rivers, and animals, including birds and insects, would ensure that the contaminating radiation is spread throughout the Korean peninsula and that food crops will be contaminated. All of this has happened in Fukushima, where the attempted decontamination continues to be a huge and enormously costly problem for the Japanese government.

Since it is most probable that we are not sure where the targets for a tactical nuclear attack are in North Korea, there is also the possibility that nuclear contamination will affect the oceans surrounding the peninsula. Following the Fukushima disaster, radiation contamination in the Pacific Ocean reached the shores of California. In the waters near Fukushima, significant radiation contamination is feared to be spreading to fish and other sea animals. One study found that the contamination risk to seafood is low, but no one knows what the long-term consequences of this radioactive contamination will be.

I believe that these long-term health legacies must be considered along with overwhelming ethical concerns as part of the "downside" of a nuclear attack anywhere on the planet.

There are disputes about whether thousands or millions would die during a nuclear attack. What is indisputable is that any of the magnitudes of nuclear bomb explosions being considered will have long lasting effects on the health of the people living in North and South Korea and likely China and Japan as well.


Explore further

How did the Fukushima nuclear power plant accident impact thyroid cancer risk?

Provided by The Conversation

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.The Conversation

Citation: How a nuclear attack on North Korea would add to global cancer epidemic (2018, February 28) retrieved 25 August 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2018-02-nuclear-north-korea-global-cancer.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
44 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Mar 01, 2018
Tactical nukes are generally much lower yield than the Hiroshima bomb, and much lower fallout

Mar 01, 2018
"What happened to the radiation that was supposed to last thousands of years in Hiroshima (1945)?" It is equal to natural background level. Japan subjected to Fukushima, Hiroshima & Nagasaki, breaks record for longevity.
https://www.quora...Hardwick
"The study of 80,000 Japanese atomic bomb survivors who were living in either Hiroshima or Nagasaki found that there was a 6% increase from the normal rate in cancer. This was surprisingly low compared to what was expected."
"There were also no genetic defects or abnormalities in children born from either one or two parents who were survivors from the atomic bomb."
http://nuclearrad...-is.html
"The leukemia incidence of 96,000 Hiroshima atomic bomb survivors is compelling evidence that the LNT model is wrong." "Life expectancy for men and women in Japan at highest ever"

Mar 01, 2018
"Chernobyl and Fukushima"
No one has died from radiation exposure at Fukushima power plant, and Chernobyl is now a tourist zone. Such kind of fearmongering articles have only served to favor the fossil fuels(backup for intermittent renewables) which air pollution respects no border and kills millions of people every year.
"by the standards of LNT, coal is also more dangerous than nuclear."
"Japanese government planning to build 45 new coal fired power stations to diversify supply" - Fev 2017
http://www.abc.ne.../8224302
"Japan's coal-fired plants 'to cause thousands of early deaths'"
https://www.thegu...eenpeace
"In Germany and Japan less nuclear means more coal but not more renewables"
http://polet.netw...nst-coal

Mar 01, 2018
Forget retaliation by North Korea.

There are nations bordering North Korea (namely Russia and China) who would not be thrilled about any fallout on their soil. Realistically: They might consider this an act of war and retaliate against the US. THAT is what the US should be worried about (i.e. a good reasons to leave nukes where they belong...safely locked away)

Mar 01, 2018
"...the ambient radiation exposure in the Fukushima region remains elevated..."
Manmade radioactivity:
- Chernobyl (5 mSv)
- Fukushima (20 mSv)
Natural radioactivity:
- Kerala (35 mSv)
- Ramsar (700 mSv)
- Guarapari (800 mSv)
Fukushima radiation (20mSv) is lower than natural background in some places(Kerala/Ramsar/Guarapari up to 800mSv) or during a commercial flight(up to 65mSv).
Carbon-free nuclear power is the safest and the most ecologically friendly even in the worst-case scenarios, fewer fatalities and less ecological impacts per unit of energy produced than renewables.
https://uploads.d...5dd2.jpg
https://pbs.twimg...Y-94.jpg
https://pbs.twimg...5hly.jpg
https://uploads.d...ca67.jpg
Stop Fearmongering!

Mar 01, 2018
If the senile buffoon, Bogus POTUS and the Whacky Korean Thug Capo d'Capo dragged the rest of us into their raving adolescents pissing contest?

South Korea's electrical supply is produced in NK hydro-dams and coal-fired plants. Seoul is just a minute or two away from NK artillery and missiles.

Immediate fallout dispersal would depend on which direction and the altitudes of weather fronts during and soon after an exchange.

Manchuria and south-eastern Siberia would receive some of the fallout. For Japan it will be an utter disaster.

Major weather will loft the radioactive dust into the upper atmosphere. It will take, what? Two weeks? To reach North America? Maybe Hawaii will luck out if not directly attacked.

For the "Nuclear Good! Peace, Unprofitable" crowd? Just how much extra radioactive particulates will your body absorb? Before you start wondering why you feel lousy all the time? At night, standing over the toilet, you'll see your piss glow.
cont'd

Mar 01, 2018
cont'd
I realize that you altright fairytails are proud of your ignorance at geography and science. Affirming your ideological purity. A pack of Sad Puppies playing at adulthood.

It is time for everybody to grow up and learn some real history. That didn't come out of a comicbook.

Most of the history of Korea has been violently divisive. I call them the Irish of East Asia. Just as I call the Irish the Koreans of Western Europe.

The brief times either have been 'united'? They invariably hurtle themselves in civil wars. The losers flee to find allies. Who they invite in to destroy the opposing Korean/Irish faction. The successful invaders look around ans say "I want what I see and I'm your new overlord."

The racists are blaming the PRC for NK intransigence. However, this is a deliberate lie. The NK Kim dynasty has been Russian puppets for more then eighty years.

Your fuhrer putz Putin will be the one too decide if he needs a distraction in the Pacific.

Mar 02, 2018
"The radiation exposure from a nuclear attack on North Korea is difficult to predict"

-Wonder what the radiation would be from a north korean container nuke in a US harbor?

"nuclear bomb explosions being considered will have long lasting effects on the health of the people living in North and South Korea"

-Wonder what the long lasting effects would be from a north korean container nuke in a US harbor?
They might consider this an act of war and retaliate against the US. THAT is what the US should be worried about
No, THAT is what you would prefer isnt it? Your hatred of this country is pathological.

-Wonder why?

Mar 02, 2018
Otto, your cult of fear and hate that you pretend is patriotism, is a sign of your personal weakness.

There has been some effort put into detecting passive delivery of weapons. Since there is no absolute foolproof way to prove point of origination?

MAD doctrine is to blame everybody and blast them all too hell. They understand the consequences and firmly constrain their own allies from exceptional stupidity.

However when Mac Daddy Superpimp Putin is channeling Stalin? An exchange limited to East Asia and Western North America might seem profitable for Russian ambitions.

And he has the two most perfect patsies, Dumb & Dumber, in place to take all the blame.

There is your dilemma Otto. When you stomp all over the world with Trumplestiltskin's infantile tantrums? Combined with the VP Pennyante preaching taliban-level superstitions. And you wonder why the rest of the world reflects your fear and hate right back at you?

They have learned what you taught them.

Mar 02, 2018
I suggest some of you read of the real effects of our bombs on civilians in Hiroshima.

If that horror does not slap you in the face, you lack any humanity whatever.

Mar 02, 2018
I suggest some of you read of the real effects of our bombs on civilians in Hiroshima.
If that horror does not slap you in the face, you lack any humanity whatever.
Double standards.
From 1945 up to now, the man's best friends(25000 deaths/year) have killed at least 5x more people than Hiroshima&Nagasaki. Air pollution from fossil fuels(backup for intermittent renewables) kills 9 millions people yearly.
https://uploads.d...9a62.jpg
https://pbs.twimg...vZpt.jpg

Mar 02, 2018
Yes, they are backups now, thanks to cheap gas, wind and solar.

But nukes are no good in backup operation, and cannot compete.

Mar 02, 2018
Hey there willis
However when Mac Daddy Superpimp Putin is channeling Stalin? An exchange limited to East Asia and Western North America might seem profitable for Russian ambitions
I've got to say that your posts are some of the most inane bullshit I've ever read here (or anywhere else).

I'm sure you think they are clever.

Mar 03, 2018
Yes, they are backups now, thanks to cheap gas, wind and solar.
Undoubtedly intermittent renewables and oil/gas industry are good partners, not enemies.
https://pbs.twimg...wzm1.jpg
"Without cheap gas, the "gas bridge" to alternative energy sources collapses. The other end of the bridge exists in imagination only."
"Gas not a bridge. It's a plank."
"A new NASA study is one final nail in the coffin of the myth that natural gas is a climate solution, or a "bridge" from the dirtiest fossil fuels to low-carbon fuels like solar and wind."
https://thinkprog...5b5f5c7/
The combo("intermittent renewables + fossil fuels") have been much deadlier than Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
https://uploads.d...f0de.jpg

Mar 03, 2018
Yes Otto, Yes I do think I am very clever!

But it is a sobering for me to realize, that my debate opponents are the bungle boys from the altright fairyland.

Such pitiful competition. I'm just shooting into a barrel of fish.

Mar 03, 2018
Shooting?

wills, sometimes it is like using grenades.

Mar 03, 2018
Rumpy has NO IDEA whatever of the damage done by nuclear weapons, . . to everybody on Earth.

Mar 04, 2018
The only satisfaction I get out of the Matricide? Is to envision those responsible for destroying the only available biosphere.

Cowering in their bunkers a few months after catastrophe.

As the lights flicker out when the last of their petrol turns to sludge. Crawling around in the cold dark. To murder and eat one another.

Finally, the last "Patriot", chocking in the foul fumes. Having to confront the realization that all that is left is to cannibalize is himself!

Mar 05, 2018
The only satisfaction I get out of the Matricide? Is to envision those responsible for destroying the only available biosphere
That, and the thing you do with your genitals.

What a freak :P

Mar 05, 2018
"That, and the thing you do with your genitals."

Please take your adolescent and disgusting stuff elsewhere.

This is a site for science, not your psychopathy.

Mar 05, 2018
gkam, I can understand your disgust with otto's pratfails. I guess it says a lot about my low-brow vulgar sense of humor, that the old flatulent amuses me.

However, I am of the opinion that sharing this site with the cranks and whacko's is actually is a public service.

First, publicaly exposing their ignorance and hate. Allows the rest of us to analyze their level of crazy and judge them accordingly.

Plus, act as a safety-valve. Hopefully keeping them from a further descent onto violent madness towards those around them.

Mar 06, 2018
I do admit some psychopaths can be alarmingly clever. But some are so dim they never learned how to use the quote button while posting.

Must be a copd thing.

"Those of us who have had experiences with psychopaths know that the language of the psychopath is two-dimensional. They are, as someone once said, as "deep as a thimble."

"... this suggests a genetic restriction to what we have called the Juvenile Dictionary. Not only are they using extremely restricted definitions, they cannot, by virtue of the way their brains work, do otherwise. Virtually all of the research on psychopaths reveals an inner world that is banal, sophomoric, and devoid of the color and detail that generally exists in the inner world of normal people."

-Which explains of course the compulsion to talk in t shirt slogans. And to make up their own facts on a science site of all places.

Mar 06, 2018
WillieWard

Although I would totally agree with you that the dangers of radioactivity have been widely massively exaggerated, there still remains a significant potential threat here from fallout that people should be concerned about so this isn't just fearmongering.

Although I am absolutely certain the most modern types of nuclear power stations with all their most up-to-date safety features are more than acceptably safe enough, the fact remains nuclear power is still one of the most expensive alternatives to fossil fuels and would always struggle to economically compete with renewables like wind and hydroelectric and, eventually when solar technology improves sufficiently (its improving all the time), it won't even be able to econometrically compete with solar.

As for the intermittency issue of renewables; that can be solved with a suppergrid and/or cheap off-the-grid energy storage by using either flow-batteries or magnesium-sulfur batteries; no rare metals required.

Mar 06, 2018
still one of the most expensive alternatives to fossil fuels
Wind and solar are not alternative to fossil fuels, intermittent renewables are just an expensive way of providing "greenwashing" for coal and gas in order to displace carbon-free nuclear power.
"Relying on renewables alone significantly inflates the cost of overhauling energy" - Feb 26, 2018
"The basic problem is that the sun doesn't always shine and the wind doesn't always blow."
"Relying on these intermittent sources alone would requiring building many more solar and wind farms to produce excess energy during particularly sunny and windy periods, plus huge storage systems that can bank hours' or even weeks' worth of power"
"Storage systems are incredibly expensive in the case of batteries—and geographically limited in the case of pumped hydroelectric"
https://www.techn...-energy/

Mar 06, 2018
otto, good for you! Bootstrapping the treatments for your own pathology.

Keep up with your therapy sessions and eventually you might drag yourself out of that wallow of self-pity.

Mar 06, 2018
Must be a copd thing
Silly me. I meant OCD. You know, all twitchy, red and raw (but very clean) hands...

Mar 07, 2018
still one of the most expensive alternatives to fossil fuels
Wind and solar are not alternative to fossil fuels, intermittent renewables are just an expensive way of providing "greenwashing" for coal and gas in order to displace carbon-free nuclear power.

WillieWard

which planet are you on?
Not a single thing you said there in that post is true.

intermittent renewables are ...


and apparently you cannot read because I just said

"As for the intermittency issue of renewables; that can be solved with a suppergrid and/or cheap off-the-grid energy storage by using either flow-batteries or magnesium-sulfur batteries; no rare metals required."

Mar 07, 2018
"As for the intermittency issue of renewables; that can be solved with a suppergrid and/or cheap off-the-grid energy storage..."
Wind and solar are diffuse/dilute, and transmission lines don't grow on trees.
When it's fairly accounted batteries/energy storage, transmission, clearance areas, operational costs, and so on, intermittent renewables are far from being cheap and ecologically friendly.
"...flow-batteries or magnesium-sulfur batteries; no rare metals required."
"battery ingredients are linked to child labor"
https://www.bloom...atteries
So...
...which planet are you on?
"72.8% Of World's Renewable Energy Is Made By Burning Wood & Dung—20x More Than Wind & Solar Energy"
"The Renewable Energy Industry Is (Mostly) A Scam"
https://nationale...-energy/

Mar 07, 2018
"battery ingredients are linked to child labor"

So has coal mining in the bad old days.
Therefore, by your own stupid logic, we should ban coal because of this.
The sensible answer is to ban the child labor and slavery, NOT the product; at least not for that reason.
72.8% Of World's Renewable Energy Is Made By Burning Wood & Dung

Not the ideal renewables but still beats coal that would do more damage.
So give them other and better kinds of renewables that don't make smoke; problem solved.


Mar 07, 2018
Wind and solar are diffuse/dilute,

You mean the wind turbines and solar panels are widely dispersed?
So what? That has never stopped them functioning.
and transmission lines don't grow on trees.

So they are man made. So what?
If them not growing on trees is the reason for rejecting their manufacture then we shouldn't build coal power stations because they also don't grow on trees.
When it's fairly accounted batteries/energy storage, transmission, clearance areas, operational costs, and so on, intermittent renewables are far from being cheap

Compared to fossil fuel power wind and hydroelectric is cheap and solar is getting cheaper all the time.
...and ecologically friendly.

How can the vast amount of smoke and poisonous gasses and smog from coal power stations and petrol car exhausts be "ecologically friendly"?

Mar 07, 2018
Baghdad Willie.

The Monty Python knight.

Mar 07, 2018
...renewables ... beats coal ...
...Compared to fossil fuel power wind ... is cheap and solar is getting cheaper all the time...
...vast amount of smoke and poisonous gasses and smog from coal power stations and petrol car exhausts...
Excluding hydro(geographically limited/site-specific), intermittent renewables have failed miserably to replace fossil fuels everywhere even after trillions of dollars spent worldwide, as they have strong dependence on coal and other fossil fuels to be manufactured/mined/transported/installed/maintained/repaired/lubricated/recycled and to keep lights on when wind isn't blowing or sun isn't shining or during prolonged droughts.
https://pbs.twimg...8Tlp.jpg
https://pbs.twimg...rLrT.jpg
https://pbs.twimg...np3i.jpg
Sunshine and breeze are a joke, carbon-free nuclear power is the only real menace to the fossil fuel empire.
https://pbs.twimg...z3RN.jpg

Mar 08, 2018
intermittent renewables have failed miserably to replace fossil fuels everywhere even after trillions of dollars spent worldwide,

So has nuclear power so, I guess according to your same stupid, we should reject all nuclear power.
Has it ever occurred to you that renewables and/or nuclear power could one day replace all fossil fuels?
Or is that simple concept far too complex for your pathetic imagination?

Fossil fuels have also failed to replace renewables everywhere so, I guess according to your same stupid, we should reject all fossil fuels.

Mar 08, 2018
"...the ambient radiation exposure in the Fukushima region remains elevated..."
Manmade radioactivity:
- Chernobyl (5 mSv)
- Fukushima (20 mSv)
Natural radioactivity:
- Kerala (35 mSv)
- Ramsar (700 mSv)
- Guarapari (800 mSv)


Source for those specific numbers? As far as I know Ramsar has around 150 mSv per year. It is still much higher than Chernobyl and Fukushima, casting serious doubt on linear no threshold radiation models. so your point remains valid anyway.

Mar 08, 2018
"People in some areas of Ramsar...receive ... background radiation that is up to 260 mSv/y, substantially higher than the 20 mSv/y ... Cytogenetic studies show no significant differences between people in the high background compared to people in normal background areas."
http://nuceng.ca/...msar.pdf
"The residents of the world's high background natural radiation areas (HBNRAs), such as Ramsar (in Iran), Guarapari (in Brazil), Orissa and Kerala (in India) and Yangjiang (in China) have lived in these areas for generations under extraordinary radiation fields. The failure of earlier epidemiological studies to report any substantial increase in cancer incidence in HBNRAs has raised some controversy regarding the validity of the linear no-threshold hypothesis."
https://www.resea...l_issues

Mar 08, 2018
Fossil fuel (CO₂) reduction can be attributed to economic recession, replacement of coal by natural gas(methane), substitution of incandescent bulbs by led, etc. not necessarily to wind and solar putting in check their ineffectiveness per money invested.
France, Sweden, Ontario, etc. are examples where fossil fuel (CO₂) reduction can be undoubtedly attributed to carbon-free nuclear energy.
"How to decarbonize? Look to Sweden"
http://www.tandfo..._oc.jpeg
http://www.tandfo...c=recsys
France: nuclear expansion = deep decarbonization; Germany: renewable expansion = almost no CO₂ reduction
https://uploads.d...bfe4.jpg
"Ontario is a clean energy leader"
https://pbs.twimg...AoYB.jpg

Mar 08, 2018
We simply cannot afford nukes any more. The ones we have are begging for MORE subsidies, and the new ones are being stopped in construction with immense costs and no payback.

All the pasted propaganda from the industry cannot save this pact with the devil.

What'cha going to do with the millions of tons of intensely-radioactive waste, which we have not even be able to safely store?

What is your address?

Mar 08, 2018
...tons of intensely-radioactive waste...
It has killed no one, emits less radiation than a bunch of bananas, and is safely stored in dry casks. Wind and solar produce 300 times more waste(arsenide and other chemical carcinogens) that is dumped directly into the environment.
https://uploads.d...de73.jpg
https://pbs.twimg...jmtY.jpg
https://pbs.twimg...qDuq.jpg
https://uploads.d...54ec.png

Mar 08, 2018
"emits less radiation than a bunch of bananas, and is safely stored in dry casks"

The nasty stuff spilled, blasted into the environment at Fukushima will give you a lethal dose in a few minutes. It is spread all over in the wrecked holes where reactors used to be.

They still cannot deal with it because it is still too deadly. Maybe in 40 years, . . .

Mar 09, 2018
...blasted into the environment at Fukushima will give you a lethal dose in a few minutes.
No one has died from radiation exposure at Fukushima, the tsunami is that was the real killer. Meanwhile, thanks to antinuclear fearmongers, Japan and Germany are burning tons of coal and other fossil fuels to keep lights on when wind isn't blowing or sun isn't shining and which air pollution respects no border and kills millions of people every year worldwide.
"Japanese government planning to build 45 new coal fired power stations to diversify supply" - Jan 2017
http://www.abc.ne.../8224302
"Pollution kills 9 million people each year, new study finds" - Oct 2017
https://www.washi...y-finds/
Antinuclear faux-green fearmongers through their "good intentions" have induced far much more deaths than all nuclear weapons.

Mar 10, 2018
WW, once you are committed to "Nuclear Only", where is the undo button? If events do not work out as safe as you speculate? How much radiation, from all possible sources, is too much?

When you are down to a handful of expensive nuclear power stations for this continent. How much is it going to cost to defend those sites from a variety of enemies?

Who bears the cost of establishing a distribution grid across several states? Who pays for protecting it?

Do you accept the financial liability for failure? Or, are you pro-nukes just going to pass it on to the sucker tax-payers. Just as you have done for the closed facilities left over from the weapons and energy research & development programs.

How much responsibility will you ever accept for past failures and future disasters?

Mar 10, 2018
How much responsibility will you ever accept for past failures and future disasters?
The only nuclear incident with fatalities was Chernobyl(<60 confirmed deaths, most not related to radiation: helicopter crash, machinery explosion), and now it's a tourist zone .
The mainstream mass media (in the pocket of vested interests) have overexaggerated at most Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima, in order to favor the fossil fuel industry; sunshine and breeze energy are a joke serving as "greenwashing" for coal and gas in order to put carbon-free nuclear power out of business.

The combo("intermittent renewables + fossil fuels") are a continuous disaster: millions of deaths yearly.
"Even the worst nuclear accidents result in far fewer deaths than the normal operation of fossil fuel power plants."

Mar 10, 2018
Intermittent renewables are said to be cheaper, but have made the electricity bills costlier and the grid dirtier and unstable, e.g. Germany, Denmark, Minnesota, California.
Carbon-free nuclear power has made the electricity bills cheaper and decarbonized the grid, e.g. France, Sweden, Ontario.
"Nuclear Energy Is the Fastest and Lowest-Cost Clean Energy Solution" - Nov 27, 2017
https://thoughtsc...olution/
"Nuclear Energy Is a Fast and Inexpensive Way to Improve the World" - Dec 11, 2017
https://thoughtsc...e-world/

Mar 11, 2018
Willie, you do seem to be intelligent enough to understand nuclear and non-nuclear energy production.

So it baffles me as to your callous disregard for present hazards and future consequences.

You should consider the concept of 'Phase Changes". And what it will mean, when there is no going back and undoing all the accumulating errors of nuclear power and nuclear weapon's production.

Mar 12, 2018
It is not necessary to be intelligent to realize that even after trillions of dollars spent worldwide, wind and solar are a fiasco at reducing emissions and replacing fossil fuels.
Renewable cultists have no honorable means to fight carbon-free nuclear power except to use "appeal to fear", scare tactics, fearmongering.
"An appeal to fear (also called argumentum ad metum or argumentum in terrorem) is a fallacy in which a person attempts to create support for an idea by using deception and propaganda in attempts to increase fear and prejudice..."
http://en.wikiped..._to_fear
"Alarmism is excessive or exaggerated alarm about a real or imagined threat e.g. the increases in deaths from infectious disease."
http://en.wikiped...Alarmism
https://en.wikipe...ongering

Mar 12, 2018
"It is not necessary to be intelligent to realize, . . "

Yes, Willie, you have already proven that.

Mar 12, 2018
gkam, "ditto"


Mar 12, 2018
"Intelligence is Important but Integrity Matters More"
https://uploads.d...8058.png
People who believe sunshine&breeze energy is cheap, clean, eco-friendly, and is replacing fossil fuels either are stupid or have no integrity.
People without integrity believe in their own lies, typical sociopaths, no matter how intelligent they are or how many degrees/academic titles they have.

Mar 12, 2018
"Integrity Matters More"'

"Too cheap to meter"
- US nuclear industry

"We'll be back online in a few hours"
- Met Ed at TMI II

"No problems in Chernobyl"

Shall I go on? Fermi I? PL-1? Hanford Babies?

Mar 12, 2018
Willikins, I was working doing tests on GE Mark I & II SRV operation and the hydraulic shock from downcomer venting into the Suppression Pool when TMI melted down. We stopped the long days of testing and documentation to watch the lies. My betters at work knew immediately the core was melted down and turned to rubble, the plant would never re-open and have extreme costs to "clean up".

There were massive releases of Primary Coolant, seething with radiation, in the very early hours of the morning. A helicopter flying over it dangling a scintillator on a long wire recorded a high Neutron flux screaming out of the top of the Containment.

But they lied and lied and lied.

The entire field is organized crime, Willie.

Mar 12, 2018
I was working doing tests on GE Mark I & II SRV operation and the hydraulic shock from downcomer venting into the Suppression Pool when TMI melted down...
And the 'unimaginably' "high Neutron flux" killed you and then mutated you in a resurrected super sociopath. Nice story, sell it to Stan Lee to make a film.

Mar 12, 2018
Oh, my, . . I guess you really don't understand how it works.

BTW, the Mark I design is the one used in Fukushima, with a torus for condensing primary coolant. You can see it in the drawings of the disaster. It is a chancy design, with little margin for error. They count on condensing the radioactive steam, and their containment vessels are too small to hold it all if it does not work.

Mar 13, 2018
... primary coolant...radioactive steam...
"All natural substances contain radioactive material. In fact, beer contains thirteen times as much radioactivity as the cooling water discharged from a nuclear power plant."
https://pbs.twimg...Foui.jpg
https://pbs.twimg...gOGI.jpg

Mar 13, 2018
Not the water gushing from Fukushima, Willie!

Want to drink some?

Mar 13, 2018
the water gushing from Fukushima
Fears of low levels of radiation at Fukushima. Goes to Radon baths. Cognitive Dissonance.
https://uploads.d...c1d8.jpg
"Misasa Onsen Japan"
"Secrets of Misasa Onsen "Therapeutic Hot Springs": good to bathe in, drink, and inhale"
http://spa-misasa.../radium/
"People travel worldwide to visit these health spas with higher levels of radioactive Radon-222 or Radon-220, products of the decay of naturally occurring uranium or thorium."
http://www.twtnp....ste.html
https://www.pri.o...ery-year
https://pbs.twimg...cYbb.jpg
https://pbs.twimg...Mkr0.jpg
"10 Places Around The World Where You Can Take A Radium Bath"
https://listverse...um-bath/

Mar 13, 2018
You can bathe in any of the three Fukushima units, now filled with intensely-radioactive water, Willie.

Mar 13, 2018
You can bathe in any of the three Fukushima units...
You can put your head inside any microwave oven, filled with intense microwave radiation.
A Fukushima lesson: "People understand temperature very well," says Dr Tanigawa. "They need that understanding of radiation."
https://www.ft.co...58b189ea


Mar 13, 2018
"You can put your head inside any microwave oven, filled with intense microwave radiation."

Would that turn me into you?

Mar 14, 2018
I'm certain that weewillie follows his imaginary friends safety instructions.

Wearing his aluminum headgear every time he sticks his vacuous noggin inside a running microwave oven.

Mar 14, 2018
Willikins, I was working doing tests on GE Mark I & II SRV operation and the hydraulic shock from downcomer venting into the Suppression Pool when TMI melted down
... and then you got fired. Boohoo. Was that temp job #10 or #12?
put your head inside any microwave oven... Would that turn me into you?
Hey maybe you should try it... it might fix those structural malformities which keep you from having the conscience and emotions of an actual human being.

Mar 15, 2018
Intermittent renewables are a scam after scam.
Perpetual motion machines,
thanks to fossil-fueled grid:
"WHAT IS POWERING THESE TURBINES IF THERE'S NO WIND?" - Mar 14, 2018
https://www.youtu...PA07kAvo
"Wind turbines use electricity to keep spinning in cold weather to stop icing"
"New wind turbine farce: How they take power from the National Grid even when they are NOT generating any electricity"
http://www.dailym...ity.html

If solar energy is so great, so why is its cleaning system done by fossil-fueled machines?
https://electrek....f?w=1000
https://www.youtu...Io30a3vA
http://solar-om.c...41_c.jpg
http://businessgr...358.jpeg


Mar 15, 2018
"If solar energy is so great, so why is its cleaning system done by fossil-fueled machines?"

Is that what they are down to now, . . . cleaning the parts of our real generating systems?

Mar 15, 2018
"If solar energy is so great, so why is its cleaning system done by fossil-fueled machines?"

Is that what they are down to now, . . . cleaning the parts of our real generating systems?
For every fact, faux-greens contrapose it with a lie. It's why they are better known as "Greenie Lie Machines".

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more