Fukushima Not Catastrophic Says Washington Post

In an April 23 editorial, the Washington Post trotted out several myths to support its argument that nuclear is preferable to renewable energy. Among them was the notion that nuclear is the only reliable source of low carbon emissions energy. WP reported Germany has been forced to import fossil fuel generated electricity after shutting down 8 nuclear power plants. Yet the anti-nuclear group Beyond Nuclear reports that Germany is a net energy exporter that reduced its carbon emissions 2.1 percent in 2011. WP argued that Japan created a mess by switching to oil in the wake of the Fukushima disaster. This argument turns logic on its head, as the cause of Japan’s increased dependence on oil wasn’t renewable energy. It was the failure of nuclear reactors to produce electricity in the wake of the 3/11 Tsunami. Probably the most laughable of WP’s claims is that Fukushima was not really catastrophic. Come again? Japanese diplomats recently reported that a High Level Radioactive Waste (HLRW) storage pool will likely explode if Fukushima’s listing Unit 4 reactor building collapses, releasing 10 times the amount of Cesium 137 as Chernobyl. If the stricken Fukushima plant doesn’t already qualify as a disaster of the highest order, the collapse of Unit 4 certainly will. In shamelessly shilling for the nuclear power industry WP is both reckless and dishonest.

2 thoughts on “Fukushima Not Catastrophic Says Washington Post

  1. anonymous October 11, 2012 at 1:03 pm - Reply

    Hello Audrey,
    I am considering voting for you but I would like to share with you what convinces me best to favor a candidate. I like to see more about what YOU are going to do. It’s easy to sit back out point out everyone’s flawed actions (nobody is perfect so there is a never-ending supply). But just the same way that I wouldn’t go into a job interview and spend 90% of the interview talking about why the other candidates are awful for the job. And perhaps they are and perhaps you really are the best candidate, I’m just more interested in what you plan to do in more detail.

    Really, I’m asking of an addition of information, not a subtraction. I am very interested in reading your criticisms too.

  2. Audrey Clement October 14, 2012 at 5:14 pm - Reply

    If you want to know more about my platform, just visit the platform tab on this blog.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.