You are here

nuclear

Tony Boys's picture

Shattered Genomes – Absorbed Dose vs. Second Event

WHO, UNSCEAR, IAEA, ICRP, governments and academia protect the nuclear industry by claiming that low-levels of ionizing radiation do not result in large numbers of health effects such as cancers and congenital abnormalities. It appears, however, that the ICRP risk factors underestimate health effects by a factor of 200 to 600. The Second Event Theory is one attempt to develop a mechanism that explains the dangers of low-level radiation. Meanwhile, in Japan recently, Mr. Hobun Ikeya, a veterinary surgeon and president of the Ecosystem Conservation Society-Japan caused an uproar by stating, “People in areas over which the radioactive plumes passed should not marry [...] If they give birth to children after getting married, the incidence of deformities may be very high.” He was referring to approximately 30 million people. He was asked by a number of Fukushima City councilors to retract the statement, but did not.

Tony Boys's picture

Scientific dishonesty and nuclear power - Chris Busby at the Royal Society

Talk by Dr. Chris Busby about scientific dishonesty in nuclear issues at the Royal Society in London last November. How do the government committees work? How are scientific papers selected or deselected for publication in the mainstream journals? How does scientific fraud become established knowledge, thereby sweeping the illness and death of thousands of people under the carpet to protect the use of nuclear materials for military purposes? It's all in here... Powerpoint presentation added on 11 Jan 2012.

New Nuke-talk forum canvasses inevitability of nuclear and population growth in Australia

An article in the Australian, "Nuclear reactor by 2022, uranium body says," by Josh Jerga, June 8, 2011, in the Age argues for a nuclear Australia based on business as usual trends implying continuing with projected population growth. These avoidable trends are implicitly used to justify pushing for nuclear power. For a long time nuclear power advocates have been getting away with this sloppy stuff. We need to specifically counter it.
Japanese resident, Tony Boys, has started a forum to give people a place to evaluate and discuss the arguments for and against nuclear in Australia at Nuke-Talk Forum FORUM NOW CLOSED, SORRY! But you can use Tony Boys' Rolling Update on Fukushima disaster on this site for a forum, and be read widely.

Japan: Walking and talking disaster: Andrew McLeod on ABC News Breakfast

China has sent in 30 extra aeroplanes to bring its people home and France is doing likewise, but at this time when immigrants are fleeing Japan like proverbial rats, Committee of Melbourne "Disaster Management Expert," Andrew McLeod, recommends that Japan actively boost its population and economic growth by importing masses of 'skilled workers'. Reinsurers have been warning people for years that the impact of disasters rises in line with population numbers, density and complexity of infrastructure. Andrew McLeod, however, tries to turn this upside down. At the end of this article we present another view, "Sustainable Japan," from a writer living in Japan, inland about 20 km from Sendai.

The plasma physics drama (Outlook from Moscow)

Moscow plasma physicist, Boris A. Osadin comes in from the cold winter with a fascinating account of the political history of trends in plasma physics theory, experiment and finance in Russia during the Cold War and today. This is an account of exotic Soviet scientific personalities and rival theoretical schools, as well as the broader associated military and international politics and the tolls on science of an 'atomic Gulag'. It is also a tale of how the financing of the ITER project today may be an outcome of the ways in which US, European and Soviet scientists exploited the crazy Cold War politics to the benefit of their research preferences and to survive.

Bernard Salt on the Population 'debate'

MP Kelvin Thomson has come out with sound arguments pointing to the absolute folly of continued population growth in Australia. Immediately there is an absolute tsunami of growthist propaganda coming out of every media organ. We look here at how professional lobbyist for population growth and a built environment, Bernard Salt, handles this crisis by suggesting that the foxes be given more power in the hen-run. We suggest that maybe the professionals should stay out of the 'debate' this time and leave it for the citizens. Bernard is also predictably suggesting that all this population growth means we must go nuclear. More on this and for the logistics of power supply and the costs of setting up nuclear in Australia, and, on the Press and the Growth Lobby, Bernard Salt and Murdoch press cook up recipe for invasion. See also "Normalising endless immigration and coupling it to nuclear power in Oz", "Ziggy Switkowski, Population Numbers and Nuclear in the Australian"

Nuclear power, totalitarian spin and overpopulation in Australia

Nuclear power is promoted by the growth lobby as an investment opportunity which will provide employment, international importance, and new industries. Rationales offered to the public are the [manufactured] imperative to provide power for projected (politically engineered) population growth and the desirability of off-setting greenhouse gas contributions from coal-fired electricity and coal exports. (Australia is the world’s largest coal exporter.) Australian planning is dominated by what the corporate sector wants. There are many indications that public sector scientists are expected to support private, corporate research and development rather than leading with public research responding to public need, which might result in moderation rather than accelerated consumption. Let's look more closely at this 'investment opportunity'. See also "Normalising endless immigration and coupling it to nuclear power in Oz"See also "Ziggy Switkowski, Population Numbers and Nuclear in the Australian"

Normalising endless immigration and coupling it to nuclear power in Oz

Rudd recently said that Australia "will continue to be a nation of immigrants into the future." This remark prompted discussion on environmental lists about the PM's brain-box or sincerity because people wonder if he seriously contemplates indefinite exponential immigration. In fact there has been a barrage of similar material on the media from various officially anointed 'authorities', coinciding with Kelvin Thomson's recent criticism of government engineered population growth. The growth lobby is also taking advantage of the situation to market nuclear power as an inevitable, with no more interest in whether we can afford it than they have shown in the other costs to the public of their high immigration fetish.See also: "Nuclear power, totalitarian spin and overpopulation in Australia", "Bernard Salt on the Population 'debate'> and See also "Ziggy Switkowski, Population Numbers and Nuclear in the Australian"

Our Energy Future in 900 words

How can we ever meet the needs of a rising number of people with growing energy demands, when fossil fuels are running out and population growth is undermining efforts to substitute green energy supplies for fossil fuels? Governments are planning massive expansion of nuclear power but it is no answer. Energy is a hugely complex issue. Brian McGavin tries to simplify the picture.

Ziggy Switkowski, Population Numbers and Nuclear in the Australian

Some people were surprised to see an article by Ziggy Switkowski in Thursday's Australian newspaper questioning population growth "Populate without perishing" and wonder if an awareness of this issue is finally beginning to permeate the mainstream [press]. Dream on...
See also: "Scanlon report underpins threat to Australian democracy"

Nuclear Fission and the future for Fast Breeder Reactors

Potentially thorium breeder-reactors would enable a process of converting all the 98.3 per cent of the natural uranium into radioactive substances which can maintain a sustained fission process in a chain reaction.
No-one is doing this yet. Why?

Scanlon report underpins threat to Australian democracy

What organisation has only 24 members of which the first ten comprise the current Prime Minister and nine past and present Australian Prime Ministers or Prime Ministerial contenders? And why would they be so dedicated to an organisation with a focus so antithetical to democracy and Australians? Read on.

Subscribe to RSS - nuclear