2009 January 04 « nuclear-news

Baby tooth study resumes, seeking links between fallout radiation and cancer

Baby tooth study resumes, seeking links between fallout from radiation and cancer

by Robert KellyST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH01/02/2009Questionnaires will soon be sent to thousands of men who donated their baby teeth half a century ago to scientists seeking to learn whether radioactive fallout in milk the donors drank as children affected their health later in life.It’s the latest step in a study that began in the 1950s and 1960s at Washington University, but then stalled for decades.Fifty years ago, concern about atmospheric tests of nuclear weapons spurred a group of local scientists and other area residents to begin the project, then called the St. Louis Baby Tooth Survey.An early apparent link between fallout and health problems was established by the study. But now, more than 40 years later, the study is resuming. Researchers now hope to find links between fallout and instances of cancer in children born in the 1950s and early 1960s…………………………… Preliminary results of the new study are expected by the middle of 2009, a New York-based scientist says.

01/02/2009 – Baby tooth study resumes, seeking links between fallout radiation and cancer – STLtoday.com

January 4, 2009 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Why Obama’s green jobs plan might work

Why Obama’s green jobs plan might work
Los Angeles Times Marla Dickerson 4 Jan 09

Some states — including Michigan — already see renewable energy as their future: It’s the only sector that appears to be making room for more employees despite the recession.

By Marla Dickerson
January 4, 2009 – “…………………….resident-elect Barack Obama wants to spend $150 billion over the next decade to promote energy from the sun, wind and other renewable sources as well as energy conservation. Plans include raising vehicle fuel-economy standards and subsidizing consumer purchases of plug-in hybrids. Obama wants to weatherize 1 million homes annually and upgrade the nation’s creaky electrical grid. His team has talked of providing tax credits and loan guarantees to clean-energy companies.

His goals: create 5 million new jobs repowering America over 10 years; assert U.S. leadership on global climate change; and wean the U.S. from its dependence on imported petroleum………………………..No one knows precisely how many green jobs exist in the U.S. economy. Estimates range from less than 1 million workers to nearly four times that. What’s clear is that clean industries have been growing rapidly without a lot of help from Uncle Sam. Worldwide, investors poured a record $117.2 billion into alternative energy in 2007, according to London research firm New Energy Finance. The costs of wind and solar power are dropping fast..

Why Obama’s green jobs plan might work – Los Angeles Times

Tags: renewab;\les

January 4, 2009 Posted by Christina Macpherson | ENERGY | Leave a comment

6 Reasons Why Nuclear Power Can’t Save Us | Environment | AlterNet

6 Reasons Why Nuclear Power Can’t Save Us
AlterNet by Rob Hopkins, Chelsea Green Publishing.
January 3, 2009. A new book shows that it is not just the cost of nuke plants and their deadly waste that is the energy source’s only problems. The following is an excerpt from The Transition Handbook: From oil dependency to local resilience by Rob Hopkins, founder of the Transition movement. It has been adapted for the web.

1. Length of time to come on stream

Commissioning and building new plants is a time-consuming business (at least twenty years), so they would have little or no impact on cutting emissions over the next twenty years, nor build any resilience in the face of peak oil.

2. Insurance

The insurance industry refuses to underwrite nuclear power, a gap it looks like the government will have to fill, resulting in a huge invisible subsidy for nuclear power.

3. Waste

Nuclear waste is a huge problem. The UK alone has 10,000 tons of nuclear waste, a pile which will increase 25-fold when the existing plants are decommissioned, with no solution in sight 4. Cost 5. Peak Uranium

6. Carbon Emissions

Nuclear is often said to be a carbon-free way of generating electricity. While that may be true for the actual generation, it is not when the entire process is looked at. The mining, processing, enrichment, treatment and disposal all have significant impacts,