Two United States nuclear power plants are on alert!

reply to post by Nosred


Yea just like Fukashima















oh wait

reply to post by Jugtalicus


Like I've said countless times, Fukushima was not up to code and had previously received warnings from the IAEA, the plant was built in the 60's and is not comparable to modern nuclear plants, it was hit with both an earthquake and tsunami, and something like this could easily be prevented from happening again with the proper safety precautions. How many times am I going to have to say this to get it through you guy's thick skulls?

Originally posted by AuntB
reply to post by MamaJ

 

MamaJ sorry about the loss of your son. You are very correct. I know of a high radiation (tower) area that had 3 children with lukemia in a school of 300. Many residence had various forms of cancer, yet the gov't did a study on one type of rare brain cancer. They found more cases of this cancer then normal in the area but it wasn't off the charts so they declared the area safe for all.

Nuclear is not safe- period

Again, I posted a link way back in this thread that proves there is no link between cancer and living next to a nuclear power plant.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Here's a graph that shows where your yearly radiation comes from,




The amount of radiation you're exposed to living next to a nuclear power plant is the same amount of radiation you're exposed eating one banana a year.

Don't forget about the viruses they recently put into the Nuclear Power Stations so as they wouldn't function correctly during an emergency. When the BBC published on article relating to it their site went down for the first time in many years.

This is clearly the agenda, send many Nuclear Power Stations into meltdown, this is the depopulation agenda, it will eventually lead us to Agenda 21

reply to post by Nosred
As I recall we had a plant in Georgia shut down due to a failed breaker in April. Then we had a plant in Alabama that shut down safely due to storms this year but...I could have sworn a nuclear plant in the south released some bad stuff this Spring.

reply to post by AuntB


Link? Normally situations at nuclear power plants are handled very well before anyone can get hurt.

Here's a link about the virus that targets power stations...we are told it's to use against our enemies, but is it to use against us?

storify.com...

reply to post by Nosred

Isn't that what Glen Beck and Hugh Hewitt were spouting. Some radio talk people were saying we should radiate our food because radiation is good for you. I heard that in Canada showed that women who had x-rays were at a lower risk of getting breast cancer. The issue I have is if you read about Chernobyl you will see that there was a rise in birth defects. Radiation may be not as harmful to adults but children and unborn children are at a greater risk to have illness and defects. I say in 5 years, if we could get the truth, I bet that there will be a rise in birth defects in Hawaii, China, Korea.

reply to post by AuntB


When did I say radiation is good for you? I said you hardly get exposed to any radiation by living next to a nuclear power plant. Most radiation we receive comes from radon gas and ultraviolet rays.

Originally posted by Nosred
reply to post by Jugtalicus

 

Like I've said countless times, Fukushima was not up to code and had previously received warnings from the IAEA, the plant was built in the 60's and is not comparable to modern nuclear plants, it was hit with both an earthquake and tsunami, and something like this could easily be prevented from happening again with the proper safety precautions. How many times am I going to have to say this to get it through you guy's thick skulls?

Yeah, like you said it could have been prevented but it HAS NOT. Do you have such faith in our greedy power providers that they will ensure everything is safe if this cost them more $$ ? Nah, they are investors and an investment is meant to be lucrative, not the opposite. They will push our plants as far as they can with investing the less money possible.

So stop saying it "could have" because nobody knows what would have happen if they fixed the plant in Fukushima. Maybe it would have been the same, maybe not. IMO, nuclear power isn't safe at all.

Peace out.

reply to post by Nosred
This is a thread here on ATS- search it.... main stream you can't really find much but when this happened, Bin Laden was killed (news wise)

Nuclear Accident at Plant in Mississippi USA gets Totally Ignored!!! Why?

reply to post by jameshawkings
You know, that is something to think about. I wonder if because of Fukushima people are focusing more upon the power plants or have these issues been happening and we are oblivious to them. Now this virus, is this the one that took out the Iranian plant?

Originally posted by bigwig22
Yeah, like you said it could have been prevented but it HAS NOT. Do you have such faith in our greedy power providers that they will ensure everything is safe if this cost them more $$ ? Nah, they are investors and an investment is meant to be lucrative, not the opposite.

Um, yeah. They kind of have to follow international safety guidelines and nuclear power plants are inspected far more often than any other type. If they don't keep up to code, it costs more money, especially if an accident happens like Fukushima. This is like saying "What car manufacturer is going to make a car safe if it costs them more money?" and the answer is, if they want people to keep buying cars from them then they're going to make them safe.

And of course reliance on fossil fuels is better. It's not like those selfless oil CEO's have ever caused eco-disasters or anything. Oh wait, Gulf of Mexico. This logic applies to both and is not evidence of nuclear power being unsafe.

So stop saying it "could have" because nobody knows what would have happen if they fixed the plant in Fukushima. Maybe it would have been the same, maybe not. IMO, nuclear power isn't safe at all.

Peace out.

If they had listened to the IAEA the disaster might not have been averted, but it would have been a much much better situation and could have been fixed easier.

reply to post by AuntB


Thank you so much.....

When I investigated possible links to cancer I realized how our body works and how our cells can change. There is so many causes and the list is long!

As for Nuclear power....its been a concern of our Government and also the people that reside in the States, since the Japan incident and we have numerous plants in the US that are just simply not safe.

I do however think we have more issues at hand to worry about such as the Earthquake and Volcanic activity that seem to be in concert. Many more fish to fry than this one...for sure.

reply to post by Nosred
Below is what you wrote on the prior page. If you live near a nuclear power plant start keeping a mental tab of who has what illness. Not everyone is affected in the same way. I read that UN report on Chernobyl and found it lacking. I would believe a criminal before a politician or any major "unbiased" organization. It may be currently safe to live near the nuclear plant you have in mind but if they get lazy and start cutting corners then you & yours are in danger.

"Nuclear power plants have been proven to have no impact on cancer rates."

reply to post by AuntB


And I posted a link to support my claim, living next to a nuclear power plant does not expose you to enough radiation to be hazardous to your health. You receive more radiation from a chest x-ray or a commercial airline flight than you'd get from living next to a nuclear power plant for an entire year, the amount of radiation you're exposed to in a year from living next a nuclear power plant is barely more than the amount of radiation you get from eating one banana a year.

Originally posted by MamaJ
I do however think we have more issues at hand to worry about such as the Earthquake and Volcanic activity that seem to be in concert. Many more fish to fry than this one...for sure.

As long as you don't build nuclear power plants on fault lines or near volcanoes it should be fine.

Originally posted by Nosred
If they had listened to the IAEA the disaster might not have been averted, but it would have been a much much better situation and could have been fixed easier.

You said it. IF.

Even in the Ft Calhoun plant, they received a warning in 2010 from NRC about the possibility that a major flood could cause core damage (Cited for second most serious category of violation) . In the beginning of june 2011, they were still "waiting" for an approval to modernise the plant. So it hasnt been done yet. That makes that plant dangerous. So, maybe there are "laws", but the way they apply them is not as good as it is supposed to be.

I apologize to all for getting way off subject. So, do we really know what is happening at these two plants? Is anyone on this site that lives near there? I read a post earlier and someone mentioned blackhawk choppers, national guard. I want to know the true danger regarding these plants.

reply to post by bigwig22


Yes I said IF, just like airplanes aren't safe IF you build them without wings. So you're surprised that not following safety guidelines causes safety problems?