And you haven't supported that baseless claim with anything aside from "AAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH NUKES ARE BAD AAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH". ( I can't help but lose respect for you when you do this crap!)
The only real way Fermi can melt down and kill you is if you're sitting on the nuclear rods nuclear bomb detonates on top of the plant. (That is not completely true and you know it!)
We didn't build our nuke plants like Chernobyl. We knew better. (THANK GOD!)
New ones being built are going to be ridiculously safer. (I'm not so sure about the rediculously part, but they will be safer)
Your scare-mongering has no basis in facts. (Wrong, and it's not "scare mongering"...It's an honest fear of something extremely dangerous and harmful to humans and the environment in general...read on, I've posted this before, but I guess I can do it again just for the hell of it...Not that you are going to give it any merit. Your best argument is only calling people stupid and making comments like ("AAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH NUKES ARE BAD AAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH"). Yeah, that really makes a statement, not so much on the topic, but of your character.)
Power plants, nuclear submarines, and nuclear bombs produce nuclear waste. There are 424 nuclear reactors worldwide, of which 109 are in the United States. A typical nuclear power plant produces 20 metric tons of spent fuel every year. The most dangerous kind of waste is spent fuel waste. Uranium oxide in the form of ceramic pellets sealed inside long metal tubes is used in power plants to generate electricity. As the uranium is used it is converted into other elements, including plutonium. Only a small portion of the uranium is converted before it becomes inefficient for generating power and must be removed from the reactor. There are currently 28,000 metric tons
of waste being stored in the United States. In Russia, they reprocess spent fuel, but because the reprocessed form of uranium and plutonium could be used to make nuclear weapons, the United States outlawed reprocessing in 1977.
Low-level waste consists of anything that has come into direct or indirect contact with anything radioactive. This includes gloves, clothing, paper towels, and even washing machines. It also includes the concrete and building materials. While not as dangerous as spent fuel waste, it still requires proper handling and disposal.
Exposure to ionizing radiation is dangerous for humans. The amount of damage done to the body depends on dosage; the more radiation the more damage. There is some risk of health effects with any exposure, no matter how small. There is absolutely NO safe dose, but there are acceptable levels of exposure for practical purposes, said to be unlikely to produce adverse effects. The risk of radiation exposure is also dependent to the length of time over which the exposure occurred. The human body can tolerate small doses that add up over time better than the same amount all at once. We are all exposed to some radiation due to the naturally occurring radioactivity in the earth crust. In addition, dental x-rays, microwaves, glow-in-the-dark watches, and other daily exposures are extremely small doses that accumulate over a lifetime. Radiation in any amount can induce malignant changes in tissue or damage the in body in other ways. Skin cancer from sun exposure is one example of chronic exposure of low-level radiation causing harm. Response to radiation exposure is individual - what produces no effect in one person may result in cancer for another. Radiation exposure can cause a variety of health problems including leukemia, various other cancers, blood disorders, heart disease, and genetic disorders that can be passed on to children...Nuclear Power Isn't Clean; It's Dangerous
By Dr. Helen Caldicott, 9/3/2001
Among the many departures from the truth by opponents of the Kyoto protocol, one of the most invidious is that nuclear power is “clean” and, therefore, the answer to global warming.
We heard this during the last round of talks in Bonn, and we can expect to hear more of the same as we move closer to the next round of Kyoto talks that are coming up in Marrakesh in October and November.
However, the cleanliness of nuclear power is nonsense. Not only does it contaminate the planet with long-lived radioactive waste, it significantly contributes to global warming.
While it is claimed that there is little or no fossil fuel used in producing nuclear power, the reality is that enormous quantities of fossil fuel are used to mine, mill and enrich the uranium needed to fuel a nuclear power plant, as well as to construct the enormous concrete reactor itself.
Indeed, a nuclear power plant must operate for 18 years before producing one net calorie of energy. (During the 1970s the United States deployed seven 1,000-megawatt coal-fired plants to enrich its uranium, and it is still using coal to enrich much of the world’s uranium.) So, to recoup the equivalent of the amount of fossil fuel used in preparation and construction before the first switch is thrown to initiate nuclear fission, the plant must operate for almost two decades.
But that is not the end of fossil fuel use because disassembling nuclear plants at the end of their 30- to 40-year operating life will require yet more vast quantities of energy. Taking apart, piece by radioactive piece, a nuclear reactor and its surrounding infrastructure is a massive operation: Imagine, for example, the amount of petrol, diesel, and electricity that would be used if the Sydney Opera House were to be dismantled. That’s the scale we’re talking about.
And that is not the end of fossil use because much will also be required for the final transport and longterm storage of nuclear waste generated by every reactor.
From a medical perspective, nuclear waste threatens global health. The toxicity of many elements in this radioactive mess is long-lived.
Strontium 90, for example, is tasteless, odorless, and invisible and remains radioactive for 600 years. Concentrating in the food chain, it emulates the mineral calcium. Contaminated milk enters the body, where strontium 90 concentrates in bones and lactating breasts later to cause bone cancer, leukemia, and breast cancer. Babies and children are 10 to 20 times more susceptible to the carcinogenic effects of radiation than adults.
Plutonium, the most significant element in nuclear waste, is so carcinogenic that hypothetically half a kilo evenly distributed could cause cancer in everyone on Earth.
Lasting for half a million years, it enters the body through the lungs where it is known to cause cancer. It mimics iron in the body, migrating to bones, where it can induce bone cancer or leukemia, and to the liver, where it can cause primary liver cancer. It crosses the placenta into the embryo and, like the drug thalidomide, causes gross birth deformities.
Finally, plutonium has a predilection for the testicles, where it induces genetic mutations in the sperm of humans and other animals that are passed on from generation to generation.
Significantly, five kilos of plutonium is fuel for a nuclear weapon. Thus far, nuclear power has generated about 1,139 tons of plutonium.
So, nuclear power adds to global warming, increases the burden of radioactive materials in the ecosphere and threatens to contribute to nuclear proliferation. No doubt the Australian government is keen to assist the uranium industry, but the immorality of its position is unforgivable.NOTE: Dr. Helen Caldicott is founding president of Physicians for Social Responsibility.