Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

7 Comments

  1. It’s as I’ve always believed. Maybe up to 70% of nuclear’s public receptiveness problems is based on a nuclear-hostile media that blatantly exaggerates relatively minor incidents, accentuates on speculation and nightmares and doesn’t ever report anything positive with anything nuclear (give cancer treatment a pass out of self-interest)..

    James Greenidge
    Queens NY

  2. If the pronuclear movement wants media attention we have to get spokespeople that will create a draw themselves, with the message being secondary (at least at first).

    What we need is some sexy S.F. babe to take up the mantel and bring a bit of star-power to the field.

  3. @ Don:

    I have only the knowledge of an interested bystander without technical education, but something stares me in the face: if reprocessing has all these drawbacks stated by the IEER, why has France been doing it for decades?

    The proliferation risk argument seems spurious: the US already has nuclear weapons, how will reprocessing there result in more countries with nuclear weapons?

    I have the strong impression there are several other false arguments and straw men in the IEER story, and I hope Rod or one of the regular commenters will fill us in.

    Aslo, the name of Makhijani is a red flag to me.

    By the way, I didn’t find a link to the IEER report, and have only read the PRnewswire release.

  4. Hm, strange story from IEER. IMHO, they’re putting a spectacular slant on a variety of issues and half-truths. Begging to be picked apart and hung up to dry on the town square I say!

Similar Posts

  • Resume Inflation Can Skew Discussion and Lead to Bad Decisions

    At least two very influential people in energy debates over the past three decades rose to prominence as “energy experts” partially based on exaggerating their resumes. Neither of these people is currently making decisions with your money as government employees, but both continue to have a major influence in a debate where it is important…

  • Critical Analysis of Mousseau Fukushima Presentation

    Editor’s Note: On March 11, 2013, Dr. Timothy Mousseau gave a presentation at the Helen Caldicott sponsored symposium on the Medical and Ecological Consequences of Fukushima. This analysis by Dr. Patrick Walden, was posted as a TRIUMF wiki soon after that event and is republished here with his permission. Dr. Walden is a retired nuclear…

  • NYAS used as part of campaign to increase unwarranted fear about radiation

    Ever since November 2009, when the New York Academy of Sciences published a Greenpeace-authored, anti-science book titled Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment, several friends of mine have been digging to try to find out why that decision was made and who made it. Ted Rockwell, a long-time member of the…

  • Atomic Show #179 – The Forgotten Bomb

    Bud Ryan is a documentary filmmaker who is deeply concerned that the world has forgotten about the fight against nuclear weapons. As part of his effort to remind people that there is still a need for activism in support of disarmament, he produced a film titled The Forgotten Bomb. In it, he interviews a number…

  • Defending nuclear energy professionals

    Barbara Billing is the author of a novel titled The Nuclear Catastrophe. Here is how she has chosen to begin her description of the book on the blog of the same name. TAKE ACTION BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE. Nuclear accidents are recognized as part of the nuclear package. They are a threat to our…

  • NRC leaders must hear from all sides, not just antinuclear activists

    It worried me to learn that on Saturday, September 22, Allison Macfarlane, the Chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), and William Magwood, one of the four Commissioners who serve with Dr. Macfarlane on the five member Commission, held a private meeting with six representatives of groups that oppose the use of nuclear energy. From…