Even without further war and without further mechanical complication of nuclear power generation experiments, the process of containment of materials is actually impossible. Hanford, Washington is a leaking disaster zone simply because the radioactive materials cannot be handled and contained safely. The materials for the first nuclear detonations were developed there. Nuclear experimentation promises devastating consequences to future stability of life on the planet. If nuclear experimentation is not ceased, it could cease all life as we know it. This is not wild deduction, but actual fact. Nuclear experimentation promises devastating consequences for the future of all life on this planet. The gross amount of toxicity already constitutes an existential threat. In 1964, the Santa Susana laboratories launched SNAP-9A, which, "Failed to achieve orbit," and burned up while falling back into the atmosphere. Its plutonium reactor released toxins and poisoned life on the planet, poisoned us all, and added another little enhancement to the toxicity and carcinogenicity to our global environment. Several years ago, NASA launched a space vehicle that depended on a "slingshot maneuver" using the Earth's gravity to carry it deeper into space. It contained enough Plutonium to kill all of us or at least to give almost everyone a really bad case of cancer.
The time, energy and resources that have been invested into nuclear experimentation are likely incalculable. It is an industry of inhuman lies and practices, one which voids all consideration of clean air, clean water and healthy food. Where humanity would be today without nuclear experimentation is impossible to say, but without it, surely the planet would be less toxic and polluted. I submit that, simply because necessity is mother of invention, if it were not for nuclear experimentation humanity could already have free, or for all extents and purposes endless and harmless, power sources. Because we have nuclear power, because we have been induced to believe it is modern technology and not totally experimental and deadly, there has not been the impetus for the last sixty seven years to search out less deadly energy sources. Moreover, because of the oligarchical collectivism exhibited in the nuclear experimentation industry, from the subsidization of the Price Anderson Act onward, it's not so wild to suggest that energy alternatives are suppressed, since these subsidies of nuclear experimentation necessarily also act to suppress more desirable alternatives.
And I'm not talking about the conspiracies of suppression of solar power capability and suppression of electric vehicles, it's much bigger than that. There are ocean currents, not far offshore of the East Coast which could spin underwater "windmills' and turbines to generate enormous amounts of power, without dangerous repercussions. This power facility would indeed be "too cheap to meter', a slogan from the early days of nuclear experimentation. And harnessing energy from currents is just scratching the surface. But hell, why bother, when you got nuclear power? Wind, wave, solar and water power sources belittle nuclear experimentation, for they are safe and endless. Any source of power is better than nuclear experimentation, however none is as oligarchical.
The dangers of nuclear experimentation have always been belittled, while the benefits of nuclear experimentation have always been exaggerated. It is an industry of truth omission. It is the industry which most frequently states "there is no immediate danger to the public" and it is the one which most frequently lies about the public dangers it poses, to all life on Earth.
When it comes to any subject, especially one as dynamic as nuclear experimentation, there are things we know and things we don't know. As explained in the Matrix of Four, the Philosophy of the Duality of Polarity there are four types of information, as elaborated on by the likes of Socrates and hinted at by Donald Rumsfeld. And as empirically obvious, the more dynamic and serious the subject the more likely people will ignore all information pertaining to it. The subject of global environmental destruction is such an extreme subject and is ignored totally to the point society continues to argue over the human effect on temperature rather than change our toxic ways, with no reasoning but oligarchical rewards.
The four types of information are the known knowns and the unknown unknowns. There are also known unknowns and finally, unknown knowns. The fourth part is the most difficult to quantify; these are intuitive or instinctual things and secrets. Donald didn't mention this fourth part, for he likely operated through secrets and the unknown knowns.
The knowns of nuclear experimentation and its negative consequences to life, it's economic and societal costs, is enough to demand we cease it everywhere. And what of the unknown unknowns? What implications for the Earth does promotion of global nuclear experimentation have? What unknown knowns does the nuclear experimentation industry possess that they are not sharing?
One interesting known known is that the EPA turned off public access to the radiation detection equipment on the west coast after the Fukushima meltdowns. It is known that the nuclear industry all over the world lies and omits the truth for each other, Japan and TEPCO, refused to admit there was any danger to the public, before disclosing there was an accident, then admitting there were partial meltdowns, later that there were meltdowns and ultimately admitting that multiple complete melt throughs had occurred. The E.P.A. turned off the radiation detection equipment.