Skip to main content

View Diary: Jump in Sea Level Slams U.S. East Coast (108 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  And the worst part of it is... (4+ / 0-)

    ...is that all of the seawater that came in here contains the same radioactive Fukushima stuff that killed every damn person in Japan, Indonesia, Hawaii, California, Oregon and British Columbia.

    Speaking as a New Jerseyan, I'd damn proud of all those people who insisted that nuclear power - which functioned for more than three decades as the world's largest, by far, source of climate change gas free energy - was "too dangerous."

    Thanks folks, for all the sand, seawater and ancient trees torn to shreds.

    Heckuva job.

    •  if they knew the English words (5+ / 0-)

      I'm guessing the children of Fukushima prefecture would say fuck you and your houses and your trees and your beaches.  We want our fucking thyroids back!  Heckuva job.  

      Thanks to the fucking cheerleaders, no one even tried to make those promising the responsible use of nuclear power to, oh I don't know, behave responsibly.  Any maybe without all the happy talk about how great nuclear power is and will be, we might be further along with solar and wind.  

      It's not that I hate nuclear power, it is that the nuclear industry has proven to be untrustworthy.  And I see nothing that compels me to change my mind.

      The only thing that gives me pause is to know that you are correct about the evils of the carbon industry.  My daughter is 3.  The thought that I have bequeathed her a world which will be incapable of growing enough food to sustain even a tenth of the current population makes me sick.  But you make me throw up in my mouth a little bit every time you minimize the failures of these lying, money grubbing, face saving bastards.

      "...you're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view." Obi-Wan Kenobi

      by thepook on Thu Nov 29, 2012 at 05:43:53 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Nuclear energy construction largely stopped (5+ / 0-)

        here before wind and solar systems were anywhere near advanced enough for general use. It fell out of favor among the public even a bit earlier.

        The problem with renewables is that it took some basic advances in materials (solar PV) and structural design and analysis (rotors) that just weren't available 30 or 40 years ago when we would have needed to start building solar and wind energy systems on a large scale. And that's only two of the technologies needed.

        Sorry, but that's just the way it developed. We didn't know how to do it until it was too late.

        Moderation in most things.

        by billmosby on Thu Nov 29, 2012 at 06:31:22 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  I'm very sorry to inform you, because you're... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        billmosby, alain2112

        ...apparently a very glib and indifferent type, that thyroid cancer, more than half a decade into the industrial practice of the nuclear enterprise, is a completely trivial risk on this planet.

        It is not thyroid cancer that is a risk to children - it's fear, ignorance and superstition that's a risk to them.

        I am fucking sick to death of the airheads who have come, this late in the game to make insipid statements that "I don't hate nuclear power" and then proceed to list insipid objections to it.

        I'm glad to see, now that the fucking planet's atmosphere is irreversibly destroyed, almost certainly for ever, that a pro forma statement that "I don't hate nuclear energy" is the only way to salvage a mote of intellectual or moral respect, but the fact remains...that there are zero such anti-nukes who claim to worry about the effect of nuclear energy on children who give a rat's ass about children.

        Right now bub, this year, and every year for the past several decades and for the next several decades to come - because of ignorance, fear, and superstition - 3.3 million people die each year from air pollution..   Half of those people are children under the age of 5.

        That's 9,000 people - 4,500 children under 5 - every damn day.

        That's 350 to 400 people every hour, 6 people - 3 children - every minute.

        There is no doubt that you have no fucking idea how many thyroid cancer cases there on this whole fucking planet, but let me assure you that thyroid cancer deaths on this planet will not amount to even one week of air pollution deaths.

        If in fact, you can show as many deaths from the 50 year operations of all nuclear reactors, including the Chernobyl and Fukushima - as will take place in the next five days from air pollution, be my guest at trying to prove it.

        Any such attempt of course, will not involve any reference to the primary scientific literature, but will consist wholly and totally of googled links to the vast stupid circle jerk of scientifically illiterate anti-nukes.

        Don't fucking tell me you care about children.   I have to face my boys every damn morning in the knowledge that the fear, ignorance and superstition - the dis tractability and selective attention of my insipid self absorbed and badly educated generation is giving them a planet that is irreversibly destroyed.

        Congratulations on your concern with your fucking thyroid.   For the record, not that it fucking matters on a dying planet, thyroid cancer is one of the most curable cancers there is.   Usually it is treated with a large dose of radioactive I-131, where after the patient can live for decades with synthroid.    But it is, again, a trivial cancer but no so trivial and your insipid remarks.

        •  For those who like to cite the slowly warmed (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          FishOutofWater, alain2112

          frog as an example of death by stealth (or climate change), air pollution is another similar case. We don't notice slow, steady, "background noise" events like the deaths from air pollution. It's just not dramatic, like some other events that do get noticed.

          Moderation in most things.

          by billmosby on Thu Nov 29, 2012 at 09:47:24 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Japan's PWRs performed well (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PeterHug, samanthab

      It's tragic that the poorly sited old BWRs at Fukushima did so much damage to the prospects of nuclear power when newer, safer reactors went through the earthquake in Japan without any major problems.

      The German nuclear shutdown was irrational.

      look for my eSci diary series Thursday evening.

      by FishOutofWater on Thu Nov 29, 2012 at 07:41:37 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not this crap again. The BWR reactors in the... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        billmosby, alain2112

        ...poorly sited nation of Japan saved lives, in spite of the fact that they were destroyed by a 9.0 earthquake and a 15 meter tsunami.

        They saved lives because they were built.

        Thus far, in spite of all the stupidity attached to selective attention about them, there are zero deaths from radiation.

        The fact is, that had the reactors not been built, the 30 years of operations of dangerous fossil fuel plants would have killed thousands and thousands of people, only you wouldn't have given a rat's ass about any of these dead.

        When Japan shut it's reactors for "stress tests," thus killing people outright by replacing the nuclear power with dangerous fossil fuels, did you write a diary about those dead?

        To be sure, you didn't.

        They were therefore safer and of lower risk compared to any other technology in Japan, including buildings, since these combined technologies, including ocean front architecture, were responsible for between 15,000 and 20,000 deaths.

        In fact, kiddie, Hurricane Sandy - thanks for that by the way - killed more people than the reactors at Fukushima:   Only a few hundred as it goes, but climate change is only now begun to reap what fear, ignorance and selective attention have sown.

        I made this point at length as I was coming to realize that the depth and intractability and power of ignorance here was no less odious than the ignorance outside of this pathetic political province of pultroonery.     Actually a friend of mine republished that diary elsewhere, and it went sort of viral, at least among people who actually gave a rat's ass about the risks and benefits of energy.  

        Here it is again, in case you missed it the first time:

        Were the Japanese Engineers Who Built Fukushima Incompetent?

        Congratulations though on your efforts to "protect" humanity.    Heckuva job.   That, um, worked out well, didn't it?

        Have a nice weekend.

        •  Ok, that is way too mean-spirited a comment, and (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          FishOutofWater

          it's also just plain irrational. If nuclear is intended to save lives, why not save even more lives by siting them appropriately? And I don't know that it's the diarist's fault that the nuclear industry shot itself in the foot with avoidable and disastrous accidents.

        •  There's a good point hidden in there (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          entrelac

          Japan's choice to use nuclear power instead of coal power saved thousands of lives that would have been lost to the effects of air pollution.

          Better siting and management by TEPCO could have avoided the Fukushima mess and its damage to the reputation of the nuclear industry. Attacking me won't change that reality.

          I really should write about the amazing success story of PWR performance in the Japanese earthquake, but I haven't. Would you do that?

          look for my eSci diary series Thursday evening.

          by FishOutofWater on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 05:41:46 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site