If a nuclear power plant was emitting dangerous poison gasses into your neighbor's air, water, and soil (food supply) do they have the right to know?::::::::
Once upon a time, ohh till I was about 46 or so, I thought that nuclear power plants had a magical way of keeping all of their radiation within an enclosed structure. Never for a moment did I ever imagine these structures leaked, nor, even worse, that radioactive releases - toxic, chemical poison gasses - were expelled out into the air (on purpose!) on a regular basis.
When I found out about this, I felt really stupid, as if I was the only one in the world who did not know. I mean, I had known about the damages caused to health and environment by Uranium oxides when Uranium is fired from military weapons (some call this Depleted Uranium). Yet, on the nuclear power issue? I blush when I admit to you I was totally ignorant about Uranium gasses released by nuclear power plants in normal, everyday, routine operations.
Talk about feeling ignorant! I was really afraid to admit this, at first. Then I read something (see link below), written by prominent epidemiologist, Dr. Bertell, who's been an expert witness before the US Congress and the United Nations and has done intensive study on the effects of chemicals on human health.
As Dr. Bertell admitted, "I was not really concerned about nuclear power plants. I thought they were totally contained, unless they had an accident."
And suddenly I felt a bit better when I realized I'm not the only one who did not know the truth about nuclear power plant emissions into air, soil, and water. And if this scientist did not know and I did not know, and many others who I've personally spoken to do not know, how then can we assume that everyone else knows about this hidden danger to our health and environment? The answer is, we can't.
And for all those concerned about the hype we've been fed in the past couple of years about climate change that not-so-coincidentally corresponds with the push for the 34 new nuke reactor applications (or 100, if McCain gets to have his way with us)? Here's a good quote:
"Promoting nuclear technology raises false expectations, usurps money better spent in energy efficiency, and substitutes emissions of radionuclides* for emissions of carbon dioxide. The intelligent customer will not substitute one pollution for another, but will rather eliminate both by more efficient energy use."
From "Radioactivity: No Immediate Danger?" by Sister Dr. Rosalie Bertell at:
So here's a question I have asked myself and now ask you to consider, too. If we know that something is harming our fellow citizens that our government does not want people to know... don't we have a moral obligation to tell them?
We must each allow our conscience to be our guide. I, for one, believe strongly that, after having learned something is endangering the life and health of others (and lethal radionuclides certainly do constitute a clear and certain danger) then we do indeed have a moral obligation to share this information as widely as we possibly can.
This push for dozens of new nuclear power plants is not just dangerous due to the threat of another Three Mile Island or Chernobyl incident. Nuclear power plants emit dangerous gasses into America's environment - and it is up to the people who know this to teach one another what is going on.
Because as sure as anything, Uncle Sam certainly has no intention of doing so. Nukes are Big Business for wealthy power holders and corporate investors. And if any of us believe we'll be seeing a public service announcement on TV anytime soon on the dangers caused to public health and the environment due to the operation of nuclear reactors? Well then go get your check book, 'cause I've got a nice, clean, tasty bushell of oysters to sell you harvested from the oyster bed closest to the drain pipe of the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant that releases nuclear wastes into the Chesapeake Bay.
For more information, see:
www.ratical.org/radiation/www.nirs.org/factsheets/routineradioactivereleases.htm
*What's a radionuclide? From Wikipedia: A radionuclide is an atom with an unstable nucleus, which is a nucleus characterized by excess energy which is available to be imparted either to a newly-created radiation particle within the nucleus, or else to an atomic electron (see internal conversion) . The radionuclide, in this process, undergoes radioactive decay, and emits a gamma ray(s) and/or subatomic particles. These particles constitute ionizing radiation. Radionuclides may occur naturally, but can also be artificially produced.
Cathy Garger is a freelance writer, public speaker, activist, and a certified personal coach who specializes in Uranium weapons. Living in the shadow of the national District of Crime, Cathy is constantly nauseated by the stench emanating from (
more...)
