I spoke to Christopher White at GE today. He had a lot to say and at least that is positive, that he knew quite a bit and would speak with me. He took the time to answer my questions in an informed fashion and had a lot of information. After blasting me a bit for the article suggesting GE had nothing to say he informed me that a total of two other people had called him to ask him about it"
He says, "nuclear energy is the cleanest base load power generation system available today."
He also points out that, "every investigative body that has looked into the event at Fukushima, including the Japanese Government report to the IAEA, the Hatamura Committee, the NISA Interim Report and the DIET have concluded that the accident was caused by the Tsunami and resulting loss of seawater pumps and all electrical power. The reactor design was not cause of the accident."
He also pointed out that Dale Bridenbaugh, who originally criticized aspects of the reactor design said that, "the changes made by GE addressed all his concerns."
He pointed out how much technical assistance GE offered Hitachi and TEPCO in the immediate aftermath of the event. He also pointed out GE gave the U.S.A. government advice, not the E.P.A. who turned off public access to radiation monitors or Canada that did the same and he did not know about that. GE donated 10,000,000 immediately after the event and GE employees another 2,000,000. GE also sent 20 mobile power generators to the scene to supplement the drowned diesel generators. GE also assisted the Tamodachai Initiative in Japan and sent in mobile health units. He insisted no one had died as a result of Fukushima industrial nuclear event.
When I asked him what GE was doing to inform the citizens of the U.S.A. about radiation and the ongoing event he said nothing at this time. When I asked about the ongoing fuel removal process at Fukushima, he said he saw that he saw that was occurring on the news and could not speculate about the potentials of accidents in fuel removal of the magnitude some are saying is possible, concerning possible nuclear holocaust scenarios. He said essentially "he could not speculate on that possibility,' and yet it's possible and therein is the original problem and hubris, that we can't deal with all the potentials inherited in nuclear experimentation. The hubris in opening Pandora's box is that they think they can contain the uncontainable and this problem is displayed in this thinking model, the thinking model that refuses to address a possibility, like the possibility of a 9.0 and subsequent tsunami causing power outage, seawater pump failure and drowning the reserve generators, multiple meltouts and severe damage. We had an overall respectful but at times heated discussion and he referred me to the movie Pandora's Promise. On which I referred him to the lesson of the original Pandora Promise in the allegory, the hubris in risking opening up nuclear experimentation, starting a fire that burns for ten x ten thousand years.