Governments must stop subsidising the nuclear chain that leads to slavery and death

miningawareness 11 April 15 Thank you for pointing this out to us all. It’s important for anti-nuclear activists to not use “nuke-speak”, and easy to fall in the trap just by constant reading. A circle also sounds like the circle of life, whereas the nuclear industry is the chains of slavery and death. Really we must learn to leave everything in the ground, and recycle what is needed.

Indigenous Australians knew to leave things in the ground. They knew that sickness came from digging in the ground. There are conductive plastics already. Plastics are more and more vegetable based. If the governments would stop subsidizing the nuclear industry, the innovative potentials are out there. Universities can’t get money for algae research but the nuclear industry gets the monies.

These ideas from mining awareness sound deceptively simple. But if you go to his website, you will find very deep and complex matters explored, often in forensic detail miningawareness.wordpress.com

April 11, 2015 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | general

3 Comments »

Reblogged this on Radiation Free Lakeland.

Comment by mariannewildart | April 12, 2015 | Reply
Fukushima proved that even though the probability of a meltdown was a 1 in 10,000 year or even a 1 in a 100,000 year event, not 1 but 3 meltdowns could occur almost on the same day! Probability dictates that an event is just as likely to happen today as it is sometime in the future, yet the NRC tends to always imply that if something does happen it will be far into the distant future, which is illogical at best and simply dangerous in the worst case. Using science to somehow imply that something is “safe” when it is not, is the worst thing those with scientific knowledge can do, because it makes nuclear scientists and engineers look like ” snake ☢il salesmen”.

Think how the Japanese regulators felt both before and after Fukushima occurred. Now imagine the staff of the NRC in the exact same situation only they are at the “Before” position making claims about what will occur “after” a “significant earthquake event”.

The USA cannot afford a nuclear accident and therefore it is up to the NRC to insure that there is Zero Tolerance when it comes to compliance with all safety regulations in order to thereby guarantee US that a nuclear accident will never happen for any reason, because Nature can strike at any time…

Excerpts taken from http://public-blog.nrc-gateway.gov/2014/03/17/nrc-defines-risk-terms-in-a-new-glossary/comment-page-1/#comment-279123

+

Remember: Nature can destroy any land based ☢ nuclear reactor!

Comment by CaptD | April 16, 2015 | Reply
The cost of using Nuclear is going up while the cost of using real GREEN Renewable Energy is going down.

‘Nuclear power is risky and unprofitable’
Mycle Schneider, an expert on nuclear energy, expects bankruptcy in the nuclear industry and “substantial security risks.”
http://www.dw.de/nuclear-power-is-risky-and-unprofitable/a-18299318

or that France cannot even afford to decommission their aging reactors despite their Gov’t. be a major owner of EDF?

France’s Nuclear Decline Exposed as Areva Confronts Cash Crunch
http://shar.es/1f78rJ

Simply put, Nuclear is pricing itself out of the Energy marketplace except where Gov’t. are providing support and why should they do that unless it is to provide Nuclear Payback* to those supporting the decision to use nuclear!
* http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Nuclear+Payback
Those that support nuclear power because nuclear power somehow supports them; no matter what the health implications or other “costs” are for others.

Comment by CaptD | April 16, 2015 | Reply

nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope