As you alluded in your article,the over reaction to nuclear fallout as a result of Three Mile, Chernobyl, and Fukushima is the greatest tragedy. The radical environmentalists did a bang up job convincing the misguided politicians that all nuclear power plants should be shut down. Any death is tragic, but keep in perspective that the mortality rate for Thyroid cancer is about 1% and it is treatable. Far more people are killed by air pollution (ie.coal). In comparison to the collective deaths from the failure of nuclear power plants, there will likely be many thousands more who will die this winter across Europe from cold exposure and the lack of affordable electricity and gas.
That's another interesting sideline to the nuke controversies and here's another that circles back to Ukraine: Germany's abandonment of nuclear power played into Putin's hands by making the country dependent on Russian natural gas.
I’m as committed an environmentalist as there is and resent the term “radical environmentalist”, but yeah, I think that we need to seriously invest in this technology because if we want to get ourselves out of the oil/petroleum dependency cycle, nuclear power would seem to be a great way to do it until we find a way to make other environmentally-safe technologies (wind power, etc.) more affordable and prevalent.
When in Cuba many years ago I came across an abandoned amusement park surrounded by barracks and was informed that this was where kids suffering radiation poisoning from Chernobyl were sent to live out the brief remainder of their lives 🤬
I meant UN Peacekeepers to protect the nuclear plants in the country from damage, notably the biggest one in Zaporizhzhia but also Chernobyl.
As far as the war, I think the Americans are doing a spectacular job of arming and providing military strategy, intel and NATO members are also pulling their weight. The Ukrainians are willing to do the job and will get it done. They are fierce and much smarter and more motivated than the Russians who are mostly conscripted kids that are drunk most of the time on duty.
Putin is being indirectly attacked by the United States already, notably as Ukraine continues to bombard and will recapture Crimea hopefully which is annexed to Russia.
there is no negotiating with a psychopath ......putin has to go ....problem is he is surrounded by layers of security.....he hold meetings at an immense table ....he is at one end and his ministers at the other....paranoia rules in moscow and it will be tough to get him .....but the russian people must try.....HARDER
The prevailing winds this time of year are from the East, so the plume will move through Ukraine and out into Europe. Putin thought of that too.
The Russian president is at the core still KGB, using every cruel and underhanded trick. While Russia is weak and getting weaker--at the start of the war with an economy the size of Italy's--Putin can still lie, manipulate and threaten with the best, and he takes a very careful read of his enemies and competitors--that is, everyone.
I wonder what the great novelist John Le Carre, now deceased, might have come up with as a way to defeat Putin and unravel his current course? If Le Carre were to concoct several different scenarios, or just to give his wisest advice--? Le Carre's books revealed a rare skill of being able to see deeply into the shadows of human character and world competition, from all sides. With a realism so far reaching, it could seem heartless to the inexperienced or naive, he was still ethical to an even deeper degree, and wanted to see those kinds of outcomes in our world. What would his acute perception and measured advice have contained?
I greatly enjoy Diane Francis' writing, but I alarmed to learn the death toll was 4,000 because that figure is hugely at odds with just about every internet search, of which here are two extracts from many. So what is the true number? Considering nuclear energy is likely the only viable carbon-free replacement for oil and gas, and considering the level of panic surrounding nuclear energy, this is a pretty important question.
Chernobyl Deaths
1. [Wiki]There is consensus that a total of approximately 30 people died from immediate blast trauma and acute radiation syndrome (ARS) in the seconds to months after the disaster, respectively, with 60 in total in the decades since, inclusive of later radiation induced cancer.
28 workers and firemen died in the weeks that followed from acute radiation syndrome (ARS).
19 ARS survivors had died later, by 2006; most from causes not related to radiation, but it’s not possible to rule all of them out (especially five that were cancer-related).
15 people died from thyroid cancer due to milk contamination. These deaths were among children who were exposed to 131I from milk and food in the days after the disaster. This could increase to between 96 and 384 deaths, however, this figure is highly uncertain. There is currently no evidence of adverse health impacts in the general population across affected countries, or wider Europe.
As you alluded in your article,the over reaction to nuclear fallout as a result of Three Mile, Chernobyl, and Fukushima is the greatest tragedy. The radical environmentalists did a bang up job convincing the misguided politicians that all nuclear power plants should be shut down. Any death is tragic, but keep in perspective that the mortality rate for Thyroid cancer is about 1% and it is treatable. Far more people are killed by air pollution (ie.coal). In comparison to the collective deaths from the failure of nuclear power plants, there will likely be many thousands more who will die this winter across Europe from cold exposure and the lack of affordable electricity and gas.
That's another interesting sideline to the nuke controversies and here's another that circles back to Ukraine: Germany's abandonment of nuclear power played into Putin's hands by making the country dependent on Russian natural gas.
I’m as committed an environmentalist as there is and resent the term “radical environmentalist”, but yeah, I think that we need to seriously invest in this technology because if we want to get ourselves out of the oil/petroleum dependency cycle, nuclear power would seem to be a great way to do it until we find a way to make other environmentally-safe technologies (wind power, etc.) more affordable and prevalent.
Greenpeace has done the biggest disservice of all by opposing nuclear energy which is emissions free and currently the best option to FFs
When in Cuba many years ago I came across an abandoned amusement park surrounded by barracks and was informed that this was where kids suffering radiation poisoning from Chernobyl were sent to live out the brief remainder of their lives 🤬
we will never know the true number of victims
A mere threat implying nuclear caused paralytic fear in the west.
If that nuclear plant has a leak that hurts any Nato country what will the west do?
Hiding under the covers is not recommended.
Telegraph our intentions now !
UN Peacekeepers is the only solution
Provide Ukraine with long range precision weapons including jets. Frighten that guy in his Moscow dacha with his safety.
Stop pussyfooting. This incremental increase only leads to a longer more costly war.
If that fails, yes, I agree - UN Peacekeepers.
I meant UN Peacekeepers to protect the nuclear plants in the country from damage, notably the biggest one in Zaporizhzhia but also Chernobyl.
As far as the war, I think the Americans are doing a spectacular job of arming and providing military strategy, intel and NATO members are also pulling their weight. The Ukrainians are willing to do the job and will get it done. They are fierce and much smarter and more motivated than the Russians who are mostly conscripted kids that are drunk most of the time on duty.
Putin is being indirectly attacked by the United States already, notably as Ukraine continues to bombard and will recapture Crimea hopefully which is annexed to Russia.
brilliant article
Yes, I realize you did.
But we have to change the opponent's strategic thinking to be able to stop this war and only his personal fear will do that it seems.
Sorry, I don't agree that the USA and others are doing a good job.
Pussyfooting is never good.
No one should risk a nuclear exchange
there is no negotiating with a psychopath ......putin has to go ....problem is he is surrounded by layers of security.....he hold meetings at an immense table ....he is at one end and his ministers at the other....paranoia rules in moscow and it will be tough to get him .....but the russian people must try.....HARDER
The prevailing winds this time of year are from the East, so the plume will move through Ukraine and out into Europe. Putin thought of that too.
The Russian president is at the core still KGB, using every cruel and underhanded trick. While Russia is weak and getting weaker--at the start of the war with an economy the size of Italy's--Putin can still lie, manipulate and threaten with the best, and he takes a very careful read of his enemies and competitors--that is, everyone.
I wonder what the great novelist John Le Carre, now deceased, might have come up with as a way to defeat Putin and unravel his current course? If Le Carre were to concoct several different scenarios, or just to give his wisest advice--? Le Carre's books revealed a rare skill of being able to see deeply into the shadows of human character and world competition, from all sides. With a realism so far reaching, it could seem heartless to the inexperienced or naive, he was still ethical to an even deeper degree, and wanted to see those kinds of outcomes in our world. What would his acute perception and measured advice have contained?
I greatly enjoy Diane Francis' writing, but I alarmed to learn the death toll was 4,000 because that figure is hugely at odds with just about every internet search, of which here are two extracts from many. So what is the true number? Considering nuclear energy is likely the only viable carbon-free replacement for oil and gas, and considering the level of panic surrounding nuclear energy, this is a pretty important question.
Chernobyl Deaths
1. [Wiki]There is consensus that a total of approximately 30 people died from immediate blast trauma and acute radiation syndrome (ARS) in the seconds to months after the disaster, respectively, with 60 in total in the decades since, inclusive of later radiation induced cancer.
2. [OurWorldinData.org] Combined death toll from Chernobyl
To summarize the previous paragraphs:
2 workers died in the blast.
28 workers and firemen died in the weeks that followed from acute radiation syndrome (ARS).
19 ARS survivors had died later, by 2006; most from causes not related to radiation, but it’s not possible to rule all of them out (especially five that were cancer-related).
15 people died from thyroid cancer due to milk contamination. These deaths were among children who were exposed to 131I from milk and food in the days after the disaster. This could increase to between 96 and 384 deaths, however, this figure is highly uncertain. There is currently no evidence of adverse health impacts in the general population across affected countries, or wider Europe.
the figures are unknown because Russia lies
I agree about Russia, but I also think the number was far smaller than 4,,000. I hope you can expand on this. Best regards