Citizen comment to the Georgia Public Service Commission, 11/8/2010, in opposition to a Georgia Power rate increase request.
There are many reasons to oppose pouring scarce public resources into nuclear projects:
1. the high cost of nuclear reactors, the long lead time to operation and the unacceptably high water usage and thermal pollution.
2. the fact that a nuclear plant to a terrorist, is a pre-positioned nuclear device that can create a sacrificial population and an immense dead zone.
3. Even without the terrorist factor, safety is problematic. Chernobyl proves that when an accident happens it can contaminate large areas for long periods. The planet’s circulation system of rivers, currents and wind patterns insure that contamination is not strictly local. A recent New York Academy of Science report puts the world-wide Chernobyl death count near one million, an assertion it would be criminal to ignore.
4. Since the early 1980s, just after reactors began operating in Maryland, Calvert County's cancer death rate jumped from 2 percent below to 16 percent above the state rate.
5. The more plutonium we create the greater the risk of proliferation. Policy-makers seem oblivious to this troubling fact, exhibiting a pathological, alcoholic-like denial.
Over 100 radioactive chemicals are created in reactors. Most is stored as waste, but some is released into local air and water on a routine basis. These cancer-causing chemicals enter human and wild-life bodies through air, food and water. Releasing these toxins into our delicate life system, and leaving what isn’t released to countless, unconsulted future generations to safeguard, can hardly be considered responsible, especially considering that there are benign alternatives.
6. Solar technology and wind generators suffer from none of these liabilities – no terrorist would have the least interest in them. No accident involving these sustainable technologies could conceivably threaten even small populations let alone the life system.
The Institute for Energy and Environmental Research has released a publication titled, Carbon-Free and Nuclear Free: A Roadmap for U.S. Energy Policy, as a book and a free download on their website www.IEER.org. This proposal persuasively details alternatives to dirty energy and could save us a great deal of suffering and wasted treasury. Please do not enable the addicted, oppose this rate increase.
There are many reasons to oppose pouring scarce public resources into nuclear projects:
1. the high cost of nuclear reactors, the long lead time to operation and the unacceptably high water usage and thermal pollution.
2. the fact that a nuclear plant to a terrorist, is a pre-positioned nuclear device that can create a sacrificial population and an immense dead zone.
3. Even without the terrorist factor, safety is problematic. Chernobyl proves that when an accident happens it can contaminate large areas for long periods. The planet’s circulation system of rivers, currents and wind patterns insure that contamination is not strictly local. A recent New York Academy of Science report puts the world-wide Chernobyl death count near one million, an assertion it would be criminal to ignore.
4. Since the early 1980s, just after reactors began operating in Maryland, Calvert County's cancer death rate jumped from 2 percent below to 16 percent above the state rate.
5. The more plutonium we create the greater the risk of proliferation. Policy-makers seem oblivious to this troubling fact, exhibiting a pathological, alcoholic-like denial.
Over 100 radioactive chemicals are created in reactors. Most is stored as waste, but some is released into local air and water on a routine basis. These cancer-causing chemicals enter human and wild-life bodies through air, food and water. Releasing these toxins into our delicate life system, and leaving what isn’t released to countless, unconsulted future generations to safeguard, can hardly be considered responsible, especially considering that there are benign alternatives.
6. Solar technology and wind generators suffer from none of these liabilities – no terrorist would have the least interest in them. No accident involving these sustainable technologies could conceivably threaten even small populations let alone the life system.
The Institute for Energy and Environmental Research has released a publication titled, Carbon-Free and Nuclear Free: A Roadmap for U.S. Energy Policy, as a book and a free download on their website www.IEER.org. This proposal persuasively details alternatives to dirty energy and could save us a great deal of suffering and wasted treasury. Please do not enable the addicted, oppose this rate increase.
No comments:
Post a Comment