Why Environmentalists Are Wrong About Nuclear Power

Nuclear Power SC2 Why Environmentalists Are Wrong About Nuclear Power

It’s an amazing irony that the only technology that could have any chance of cutting CO2 emissions from the generation of electricity 80% by 2050 is being ostracized by environmentalists.

One of their reasons for opposing nuclear power is fear of radiation, even tiny doses. Opponents of nuclear power chant remember “Chernobyl” and “Three Mile Island” whenever the subject comes up.

The Union of Concerned Scientists and National Resources Defense Council, among others, are ardently opposed to nuclear power, but simultaneously champion climate change and their belief that CO2 emissions must be cut in the United States 80% by 2050.

As shown in the series on CO2 Fool’s Errand these past few weeks, it’s virtually impossible to cut CO2 emissions 80% without nuclear power.

A rational understanding of radiation would help alleviate people’s fear of radiation that’s being exploited by the organizations opposed to nuclear power.

To this end, a new book Radiation and Reason, by Wade Allison, delves into why radiation should be respected, but not feared.

My article Radiation Fears addressed the issue, including the effects of Chernobyl.

The Linear No Threshold (LNT) hypothesis asserts that radiation is dangerous at any level, and this has been the guiding principle behind the public’s understanding of radiation for the past seventy years.

Professor Wade Allison is a Fellow of Keble College and Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of Oxford and his new book examines why, based on today’s knowledge, LNT is wrong.

He asks, with birds nesting unaffected in the Chernobyl sarcophagus and animals running around unscathed in the area around Chernobyl, “is there something wrong with the accepted orthodox view of the dangers of radiation to life?”

He goes on to examine the LNT approach to radiation.

The book also describes in considerable clarity, some of the basic principles surrounding radiation, including an overview of the entire radiation spectrum from AM radio to gamma rays. He explains why nuclear power is inherently safe, and made even safer with the latest designs that can shut down without fear of overheating the core.

By providing this overview, Professor Wade establishes a scientific basis for his comments that the reader can follow.

A key message from this book, and from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), is that people need to be told the truth about radiation.

The IAEA said: “The Chernobyl accident resulted in many people being traumatized by the rapid relocation, the breakdown in social contacts, fear and anxiety [about the unknown].”

The lack of communications and the lack of knowledge among the people about radiation created fear – nameless and unreasonable fear.

The Fukushima accident has reignited fear among people about radiation. When a tuna fish off the coast of California was found to have low levels of radiation, it was headlined by the media. Those opposing nuclear power have used Fukushima to exploit people’s fear about radiation.

Nature recently reported on studies by the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) and by the World Health Organization (WHO) on the Fukushima accident. Both conclude that “few people will develop cancer as a consequence of being exposed [to the radiation at Fukushima].”

According to the Nature article, the psychological risk may be far greater than any radiation risk.

Eliminating the LNT view of radiation, and allowing people to realize that low doses are not harmful, could help restore people’s acceptance of nuclear power as being a safe, pollution free and economic method for generating electricity.

Read more of Donn’s columns at his blog Power For USA

Photo credit: Paul J Everett (Creative Commons)

Related posts:

  1. Savage: Media Spewing Nuclear Hysteria Opening his popular syndicated radio show today, Michael Savage warned…
  2. Netanyahu Certain Of Iranian Nuclear Threat: ‘We Know’ Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu explained Tuesday that his government is certain…

Do you have $25,000 in your IRA or 401(k)? This "Loophole" in IRS Code lets you move your savings to gold ... get this NO-COST Info Guide >

1 comment to Why Environmentalists Are Wrong About Nuclear Power

  • OISEAU

    Whilst respecting the right to publish, it is incredible and disturbing that Professor Wade Allison, whilst professors 'profess to know', could even consider being part of this piece of PR distortion, when the Japanese have just expelled a high-ranking US official for possible involvement in the Fukushima tragedy! Try explaining to the victim nation how benign it is to suffer the 18,000 still-births and the embryo deformities now recorded. A friend of mine, a prisoner of war in a mine at Hiroshima when 'Big Boy' or whatever it was called was dropped, came up with his co-prisonners, to find . . .NOTHING! , and has just passed away after terrible, extended radiation damage.
    Can he have forgotten the frogs with no eyes and extra legs at Chernobyl? Would he, I wonder, consider building his home and making his garden there? What of 'COLD FUSION' and 'WATER FOR FUEL'; of Tesla's and Howard Johnson's patents, and the 'cover-up'? – which is falling to pieces as intelligent people start to use their own Clean Energy devices. OISEAU!

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>