Nuclear Power and PUBLIC OPINION – theme for October 2018
You will note that this opinion poll graph is from 2011. Out of date? Yes.
The nuclear lobby is not keen on public opinion polling. And for good reason. This is the most recent global polling, coming up with 62% of people worldwide. opposed to nuclear power.
BUT, if you search for graphs on public opinion and nuclear power – you will find many recent ones that appear to show that the nuclear industry is now popular.
The global nuclear lobby has been very careful, since 2011 to conduct polls with “loaded” wording – hence those many “favourable” graphs to be found on the internet.
Opinion polls depend on the wording, as well as on the sample size and constituency of the respondents. There are polls that focus on nuclear weapons as being distinct from “peaceful” nuclear power, polls that suggest that nuclear is essential for medicine. for climate change action, and so on.
Yes, there are communities that support nuclear power. That includes many communities where many depend on the industry for their livelihood.
The nuclear industry is in top gear, trying to win the hearts and minds of people. But, it’s not succeeding. Sadly, it is winning (through expensive lobbying and funding) the hearts and minds of politicians – and of course, all those whose career depends on nuclear power.
Of course, even this poll was not totally accurate, in every detail. There are gaps – what do the people think, in totalitarian China, or Russia?
But, it must be a worry to the nuclear industry, that so many scientists, from so many disciplines – medical, climate, environmental, radiological, now oppose nuclear power. Not to mention the economists, who point out the costs of 
the total nuclear fuel chain.
In the coming months, the nuclear lobby will go all out to change public opinion. Their biggest push will be to downplay the health effects of ionising radiation, and to portray Fukushima nuclear meltdown as now solved – a 
healthy place to stage the 2020 Olympics.
The nuclear lobby will even push the idea that nuclear radiation is beneficial – even is a prevention and a treatment for various illnesses.
But it will be an uphill fight, for the global trend is now to distrust the nuclear industry, and for good reason.
Tritium was identified as the primary culprit in damaging fetuses and mothers’ rapidly diving cells.
 Paul Richards Nuclear Fuel Cycle Watch South Australia, 6 Oct 18, This information was tabled in December 2007; as these were the findings of the German KiKK Study, ‘‘Epidemiologische Studie zu Kinderkrebs in der Umgebung von Kernkraftwerken’’ ‘‘Epidemiological Study of Childhood Cancer in the Vicinity of Nuclear Power Stations”^ and then subsequently was made public this decade. To date, no studies with NRC oversight have attempted to replicate the same methodology used in the 2007 KiKK Study. Nonetheless, there have been plenty of opinion pieces in response to the study, pontificating why these results exist, how they are wrong, or even claiming the results are inconclusive. Which interestingly, are written by those affiliated with vested interest groups in the nuclear industry. Where just claiming multiple epidemiology studies prior to this demonstrate contrary data. Unfortunately, this carries little, if any scientific weight. Furthermore, the effect measured, quantified and subsequently published in Germany has never been discredited by peer review on the basis of replicating the study methods anywhere. The outcome is the German KiKK Study^ stands alone unchallenged as a new benchmark verifying rapidly dividing cells in the womb and in mothers are actually affected detrimentally by tritium created in nuclear reactors. Creating leukaemia and birth defects in unborn babies. Which in turn, is one of the central reasons for the phase-out of nuclear reactors in Germany, as most readers here are well aware many other nations have taken the lead on. German : http://www.kinderkrebsregister.de/…/pID8_20110808_DE.pdf https://www.bfs.de/…/ergebnisse/kikk/kikk-studie.html https://www.facebook.com/groups/1021186047913052/ |
1.This Month
Radiation Containment A New Concern In Russian Nuclear Incident | Rachel Maddow | MSNBC
Fukushima 2020 Olympics Nightmare: Is PM Abe Criminally Insane?
Accelerating Sea-Level Rise with Increase in Extreme Weather Frequency, Severity, and Duration
Arctic-Sea Ice Collapse: Greenland Vulnerability; Global Sea-Level Rise; Extreme Weather Mayhem
How the viewing public was ‘protected’ from seeing what the Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear bombing did to people
Hiroshima and Nagasaki on the cutting room floor https://thebulletin.org/2019/08/hiroshima-and-nagasaki-on-the-cutting-room-floor/ By Thomas Gaulkin, August 5, 2019 Seventy-four years after nuclear weapons were first and last used in war, it can be challenging to conceive of the devastation they cause. But even in the immediate months after the atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945, news accounts offered a view of ingenuity and destruction that often elided the human cost.
The newsreels below [on original] were mainly screened to audiences in 1946 and 1947 and detail the destructive force of the explosions almost entirely through excited accounts of the structural damage to the cities. There’s occasional mention of the lost city populations and the scientific knowledge to be gained from studying their casualties, but hardly any description of what people actually suffered, let alone personal accounts. It’s instructive to look at and listen to these reports today, and contemplate what is missing.
The 12-minute reel below was produced by the US War Department in 1946. “Tale of Two Cities” makes selective use of film that was confiscated from a Japanese filmmaker, Akira Iwasaki—though you wouldn’t know that from the narration, which boasts that “army cameramen have found and filmed pictorial evidence that tells in twisted steel and stone the effect of death-dealing atomic power.” (Some twenty years later, historian Eric Barnouw obtained more of Iwasaki’s footage and produced a remarkably different narrative that documented the horrible physical impact of the attacks on Hiroshima’s citizens.)
Contrasted with the triumphant tone of the news/propaganda made for 1940s audiences, silence changes everything. Made public only decades later, the two films below —one beginning with footage of wounded victims, the other, a full-color glimpse of survivors picking up the pieces of the ruined city—report what those above do not, without a single word.
PETITION
Free Julian Assange, before it’s too late. Sign to STOP the USA Extradition
-
Archives
- August 2019 (176)
- July 2019 (390)
- June 2019 (354)
- May 2019 (326)
- April 2019 (366)
- March 2019 (366)
- February 2019 (317)
- January 2019 (341)
- December 2018 (310)
- November 2018 (306)
- October 2018 (329)
- September 2018 (383)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
