Nuclear Power Is Not the Answer this question feed

asked by aries on November 18, 2006 6:27 PM
The world-renowned antinuclear activist's myth-busting look at the real costs and consequences of nuclear energy.

"Dr. Caldicott is one of the most articulate and passionate advocates of citizen action to remedy the nuclear and environmental crises."—from the citation for the 2003 Lannan Cultural Freedom Prize

In a world torn apart by wars over oil, many politicians are increasingly looking for alternative sources of energy—and their leading choice is often nuclear. Among the myths that have been spread over the years about nuclear-powered electricity are that it does not cause global warming or pollution (i.e., that it is "clean and green"), that it is inexpensive, and that it is safe. But the facts belie the barrage of nuclear industry propaganda:
• Nuclear power contributes to global warming
• The real costs of nuclear power are prohibitive (and taxpayers pick up most of them)
• There's not enough uranium in the world to sustain long-term nuclear power
• Potential for a catastrophic accident or terrorist attack far outweighs any benefits.

Trained as a physician, and—after four decades of antinuclear activism—thoroughly versed in the science of nuclear energy, the bestselling author of Nuclear Madness and Missile Envy here turns her attention from nuclear bombs to nuclear lightbulbs. As she makes meticulously clear in this damning book, the world cannot withstand either.


Reviews

Thumb_up
Thumb_down

0%
0%
Helen Caldicott was right, if somewhat extreme, about nuclear weapons, but she is wrong about nuclear power. We have two choices: coal and nuclear. Clean coal is impossible with current technology. We can slow and perhaps reverse global warming by replacing all our coal-fired electric power plants with nuclear, solar, and wind power plants, and by using electric cars.

reviewed by runabout on November 25, 2006 10:59 PM

Thumb_up
Thumb_down

0%
0%
This book is important for everyone to read. We must know all sides of a subject and now that we are looking for alternative power sources the attention has turned to nuclear power. We need to understand the science behind why this is NOT an alternative. We need to look somewhere else. We need to know the threat that nuclear power presents to our life now and in the future. Dr. Caldicott knows what she is writing about.
reviewed by 90210 on November 29, 2006 6:01 AM

Thumb_up
Thumb_down

0%
0%
You need to read this book if your govenment is proposing reactors.
You will also need to read other books, about dosages and mortalities. Caldicott's earlier work might suffice.

HC has a quote from Time magazine
Paul Blanche "A knowledgeable terrorist inside a control room can cause a meltdown in fairly short order" Time 20Jun2005
- that sends a chill down the spine. I had hoped that they made reactors kind of 'fail-safe'

The tanks of spent fuel, often outside running reactors, require uninterupted pumps, or they might emit huge clouds of radiation. Ghastly.

Note to Helen C: the 1996 Tritium leak from Pickering4 was 50 trillion becquerels ie 1300 Curies , not 50 Trillion Curies (page 116). Still Tritium is unpleasant to drink, it gets into your DNA.

HC goes into detail about proposed 'Inherently Safe' (sic) pebble reactors. If air gets in, the graphite pebbles catch fire. Wormwood was burning graphite. Previous reviewer undoubtedly eats Welsh Lamb every week. He can be thankful that its still checked for radiation, 20 years after the event.
reviewed by tubi on November 29, 2006 8:39 AM

Thumb_up
Thumb_down

0%
0%
Caldicott has not changed. Her approach to nuclear energy is list some emitted radioactive isotopes of a process or perhaps some barely probable radioactive emissions. She neglects to mentions the doses are almost invariably minute, do not harm human health, and are way below radiation doses provided by mother nature.

A case in point is her description of the Chernobyl accident. Caldicott annunciates that radioactive isotopes fell over large parts of Europe. She does not tell the reader that the radioactivity was not large enough to harm human health except for the area around the plant. She also does not mention wildlife is now thriving in the area around the power plant that was cleared of its population. Caldicott also does not relate that the Chernobyl power plant was a particularly accident prone design of nulcear reactor that was rejected in all countires outside the Soviet Union.

Caldicott's "work" in this book was refuted before it was even written by Ed Hiserodt in his masterful book Underexposed. Unlike Caldicott Mr. Hiserodt carefully describes the radiation units, the effect of radiation on human health, and the true effects of the Chenobyl accident.

In fact nuclear power is needed to provide reliable clean power for present and future generations of humanity and thus fight oppression and poverty. Ed Hiserodt's book educates. Caldicott's "work" can only cast ignorance and darkness.
reviewed by bethness on November 29, 2006 9:48 AM

search

 
 

browse

book tags