2011-03-18 10:24:55
The linked source does NOT validate that assertion whatsoever. [nytimes.com]
The 'plume' is a forecast of the way a plume would take shape across the
pacific, if it were to exist. No-one is saying that there is a radioactive
smoke plume of any magnitude, including undetectable. It is a weather forecast,
meant for internal consumption by various national nuclear agencies for
contingency planning and leaked to the NYT, nothing more.
From New York to Germany, politicians are proposing shutting-down nuclear
plants.
Talk about jumping to rash conclusions. What are we supposed to use for power
once the oil/coal becomes scarce and as expensive as silver? We need nuclear
power as a replacement fuel (and supplemented by solar).
They've learned that fear can be converted directly into money, by way of
voters. Who do you think is going to be selling you that coal?
Welcome to media hype and the anti-nuclear nuts run amok. By the way, next time
they trot out the "experts", jot down the names and do a search. You'll find
most of them are linked to anti-nuclear groups.
people have short memories, BP just got through destroying much of the Gulf of
Mexico with IMHO a much worse Oil Disaster.
The MIT Department of Nuclear Engineering has a web site, updated regularly,
which acts as a hub for information about the nuclear crisis, including helpful
background information.
See it at: http://mitnse.com/ [mitnse.com]