Culture and Coexistence into the Great Unknown
The use of sustained nuclear fission to generate heat and electricity poses significant hazards to people and the environment, and should be discontinued for more clean, sustainable and renewable energy options.
San Onofre’s nuclear reactors are permanently shut down. However, Southern California Edison has left tons of highly radioactive nuclear waste that will remain on site for decades, if not longer. San Onofre’s spent fuel contains 89 times the amount of radiation (Cesium-137) released from Chernobyl. What is being done to rectify this situation?
Almost two and a half years after the nuclear meltdowns at Fukushima, the head of Japan’s Nuclear Regulatory Authority (NRA) raised concern on August 5 about the continued flow of radioactive water from the plant going into the Pacific Ocean, telling Reuters, “Right now we have a state of emergency.” Hmm, yes, sounds about right.
8.4 million people, put at risk for radioactive disaster from a meltdown at San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, now rejoice as Southern California Edison announces its closure.
While large fish fail to thrive at Southern California Edison’s artificial reef off the coast of San Clemente, California, mitigation mandated by the California Coastal Commission to repair destroyed kelp beds at their San Onofre Nuclear Plant (called SONGS), a wider marine mammal crisis is ongoing. Could radiation released from SONGS be the culprit in both cases?
Southern California Edison says its analysis confirms that it would be safe to fire up the nuclear plant’s Unit 2 reactor, but as a precautionary move it is proposing running it at only 70%. Yet it also suggests that running San Onofre at 100 percent for 11 months would present a strong possibility of a tube rupture resulting in a catastrophic release of radiation into the environment.
For darn sure don’t mention that cancerous creaky ol’nuke plant you were so handsomely paid to cheer for. Because talk of radioactivity at home, in the workplace, or at your kid’s school, ruins an otherwise perfect day, no matter what.
Paul Krugman defines a Zombie-idea as: a proposition that has been thoroughly refuted by analysis and evidence, and should be dead — but won’t stay dead, because it serves a political purpose, appeals to prejudices, or both. Sounds like nuclear power policies…