From: GERALD LEVY (gerald_a_levy@msn.com)
Date: Sat Feb 16 2008 - 09:43:12 EST
> That even the most serious nuclear accidents cause relatively> few casualties --- certainly compared to deaths in coal mine> disasters over the comparable period. =================================== Hi Paul C: It's not simply a question of how many people die immediately as a consequence of a disaster. Without doubt, many more people have died as a direct and immediate result of coal mining disasters than as a result of disasters at nuclear power plants. When coal mine disasters happen, there is loss of life for coal mine workers. When nuclear power generation accidents occur, there are also more far-reaching consequences. For example, for the health of populations (often working-class communities) living near nuclear power plants. Even without "accidents" there are questions concerning the long-term health of people living in nearby communities. Nuclear power plant accidents can indeed lead to large-scale displacement and de-population of regions. And, for how long? Decades? Hundreds of years? Thousands of years? We don't really know how long is required to make such areas safe to live in again. We do know, though, that it would require a *massive* expenditure of resources (no doubt, paid for by the public since the liability of nuclear power companies is limited). Furthermore, the effects on human populations could extend hundreds of miles away from the accident. Thus, Finland and many other European countries (in addition, of course, to the Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia) were impacted by the Chernobyl disaster. Did the Finns drop dead the next day after the disaster? Of course not. But, with nuclear power accidents you also have to look at long-term health consequences. For instance, the impact of the accident on other species and how that then affects the "food chain" and, ultimately, people. Think of the consequences of the radioactive contamination of land, air, and water. Having nuclear-power generation is like Russian Roulette - except the odds are better (than 1 in 6) and the consequences are much worse (thousands can suffer and die instead of 1). It's a very big gamble with human (and other) life. Instead of favoring nuclear power, we should be favoring more energy-efficient and Green technologies and opposing the tremendous amount of waste of natural resources by capitalists and nation states. We should favor solutions that demand that those responsible for the mess (capitalists and states, especially in and from advanced capitalist nations) clean it up rather than shifting the burden to working people and the poor of the world. We need to Think (Marxian)Green, not Think Radioactive. In solidarity, Jerry _______________________________________________ ope mailing list ope@lists.csuchico.edu https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Feb 29 2008 - 00:00:03 EST