Uh, Oops

Via the Consumerist:

When Greenpeace mobilized to protest nuclear energy at a recent appearance by
President Bush to promote his nuclear energy policy, they forgot to fill in all
the boiler-plate.

From the Greenpeace anti-nuclear-armageddon flier. Capitals and brackets are
theirs:

    In the twenty years since the Chernobyl tragedy, the world's worst nuclear
    accident, there have been nearly [FILL IN ALARMIST AND ARMAGEDDONIST FACTOID
    HERE]."

LOL.  By the way, I am not sure why those paranoid about global warming would refuse to reconsider nuclear power.   In that article, i pointed out that a different regulatory regimed would greatly reduce costs and actually enhance safety:

If aircraft construction was regulated like nuclear power plants,
there would be no aviation industry.  In the aircraft industry,
aircraft makers go through an extensive approval and testing process to
get a basic design (e.g. the 737-300) approved by the government as
safe.  Then, as long as they keep producing to this design, they can
keep making copies with minimal additional design scrutiny.  Instead,
the manufacturing process is carefully checked to make sure that it is
reliably producing aircraft to the design already deemed safe.  If
aircraft makers want to make a change to the aircraft, that change must
be approved with a fairly in-depth process.

Beyond the reduction in design cost for the 2nd airplane of a series
(and 3rd, etc.), this approach also yields strong regulatory benefits.
For example, if the actuation screw for the horizontal stabilizer is deemed to be of poor or unsafe design
in a particular aircraft, then the government can issue a bulletin to
require a new approved design be retrofitted in all other aircraft of
this series.  This happens all the time in commercial aviation.

One can see how this might make nuclear power plant construction
viable again.  Urging major construction companies to come up with a
design that could be reused would greatly reduce the cost of design and
construction of plants.  There might still be several designs, since
competing companies would likely have their own designs, but this same
is true in aerospace with Boeing, Airbus and smaller jet manufacturers
Embraer and Bombardier.

And a while back I linked to a story on how the ultimate fallout from Chernobyl was not nearly as bad as was feared.  That article said in part:

Over the next four years, a massive cleanup operation
involving 240,000 workers ensued, and there were fears that many of
these workers, called "liquidators," would suffer in subsequent years.
But most emergency workers and people living in contaminated areas
"received relatively low whole radiation doses, comparable to natural
background levels," a report summary noted. "No evidence or likelihood
of decreased fertility among the affected population has been found,
nor has there been any evidence of congenital malformations."

In
fact, the report said, apart from radiation-induced deaths, the
"largest public health problem created by the accident" was its effect
on the mental health of residents who were traumatized by their rapid
relocation and the fear, still lingering, that they would almost
certainly contract terminal cancer. The report said that lifestyle
diseases, such as alcoholism, among affected residents posed a much
greater threat than radiation exposure.

  • Mark

    More than pro environment, Greenpeace et. al. are anti human. Once you accept that, it is easier to see past the apparent illogic of their positions.

  • http://www.humanadvancement.net/blog Kyle Bennett

    Mark pretty much nailed it. Add to that that these people benefit from the existence of problems, not from solutions. The most crass of them prefer the status quo, even if unconsciously, because as long as it maintains, they have a source of money and attention. The most evil of them see humans themselves as the problem, and are using environmentalism as a path to their preferred solution. In either case, any solution that allows humans to exist in an industrial civilization without destoying the environment undercuts their goals.

    For a fascinating look at Chernobyl today:

    http://www.kiddofspeed.com/

    This girl rides her motorcycle through the place, and even goes into the buildings, geiger counter and camera always at her side. She makes observations on things like how the roads are safe, but she can't go off road because the radiation in the soil is still too high, and how the apartments that faced the plant are still too hot, but the ones on the other side of the building are OK to explore for a short time. Creepy photos.