The email sent will contain a link to this article, the article title, and an article excerpt (if available). For security reasons, your IP address will also be included in the sent email.
By KEVIN KAMPS
http://counterpunch.org/kamps07222011.html
The nuclear power industry has spent a lot of money on public relations and national advertizing campaigns aimed at convincing the public and decision makers that atomic energy is a solution to the worsening climate crisis. But extreme weather, likely made more frequent and intense by the growing concentration of heat-trapping greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, means that nuclear power is too risky to operate amidst the climate chaos. Current historic floods on the Missouri River, threatening the Fort Calhoun and Cooper (of the same design as Fukushima) atomic reactors in Nebraska, have underscored the point. So has a historic wildfire that recently came dangerously close to tens of thousands of 55 gallon barrels of plutonium-contaminated wastes at the Los Alamos nuclear weapons lab in New Mexico.
Fortunately, a record number of tornadoes, some of record size, this spring across the Midwest, South, and Southeast, did not strike atomic reactors, although some were forced to shut down as a safety precaution when primary electric grids failed. Previous direct hits by tornadoes at atomic reactors, such as Davis-Besse, Ohio, in June 1998, came close to causing a catastrophic radioactivity release, as did Hurricane Andrew at Turkey Point nuclear power plant near Miami in 1992.
Given their vulnerable locations, on sea coasts, rivers, the Great Lakes, etc., atomic reactors grow more risky with the worsening climate crisis. In fact, the 104 operating reactors at 65 sites in 30 states across the U.S. are almost all vulnerable to extreme weather events.
Return to Article