|
Post by eclipse on Jan 15, 2015 11:23:08 GMT 9.5
'Wishful thinking and misinformation': An open letter to nuclear lobbyists JIM GREEN 18 DEC 2014, 9:43 AM CLIMATE ENERGY MARKETS A group of conservation scientists has published an open letter urging environmentalists to reconsider their opposition to nuclear power. The letter is an initiative of Australian academics Barry Brook and Corey Bradshaw. The co-signatories "support the broad conclusions drawn in the article 'Key role for nuclear energy in global biodiversity conservation', published in Conservation Biology." The open letter states: "Brook and Bradshaw argue that the full gamut of electricity-generation sources − including nuclear power − must be deployed to replace the burning of fossil fuels, if we are to have any chance of mitigating severe climate change." So, here's my open letter in response to the open letter initiated by Brook and Bradshaw. Dr Jim Green is the national nuclear campaigner with Friends of the Earth, Australia. www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2014/12/18/energy-markets/wishful-thinking-and-misinformation-open-letter-nuclear-lobbyists
|
|
|
Post by Roger Clifton on Jan 15, 2015 13:35:48 GMT 9.5
Eclipse. We already know that you can cut-and-paste. But rubbing our noses in this vast slab of antinuclear propaganda is a bit offensive. It also confuses visitors: are we a community of clear thinkers protecting the greenhouse or a bunch of luddite agitators? Please delete it.
Give us the link by all means, but also give us good reason why we should bother to visit it. I for one would be much more interested in your own opinion on its content. Then after reading a few lines of your thoughts, we can choose whether or not to engage with your opinion, not his.
But at the moment I feel as though you are trying to sool me onto this author like you might sool a dog onto a visiting salesman.
PS Moderator has since removed the pasted text of the anti-nuke letter from Eclipse's post. The link to it remains, allowing access for anyone who wants to read it.
|
|
|
Post by David B. Benson on Jan 16, 2015 10:36:55 GMT 9.5
Jim Green engages in a subtle lie. While plutonium can be extracted from IFR actinides plus waste, Pyroprocessing leaves a mixture of uranium and plutonium in mixture of isotopes which cannot explode. Even further chemical refinement to separate the uranium from the plutonium, both contain a mixture of isotopes which cannot explode.
But more, all these mixtures are highly radioactive and so even a suicidal agent will never be able to make off with milligrams of the stuff.
This missive simply demonstrates, once again, why I call FOE the Fiends of the Earth.
|
|
|
Post by eclipse on Jan 19, 2015 11:29:06 GMT 9.5
Hi Roger, Yes, I guess you’re right: copying and pasting the whole thing might indicate to some readers that we endorse the article’s views! I’ll keep it short & simple in future. Hi David Benson, Which peer-reviewed source explains pyroprocessing & proliferation for the lay reader? From where my (humanities) brain sits, the words “While plutonium can be extracted from IFR actinides plus waste” means they’ve already got the materials for a bomb? Or are you saying that pyroprocessing *is* their attempt at extraction, and will always have mixed isotopes that prevent the extracted plutonium exploding?
|
|
|
Post by David B. Benson on Jan 20, 2015 9:44:22 GMT 9.5
eclipse --- "Plentiful Energy" explains pyroprocessing. After the actinide pins have reacted for some time it is necessary to remove the actual wastes. The electrochemistry produces three streams; the first is a mixture of uranium and plutonium; the second is uranium; the third is (mostly) just wastes. The first stream can never be used to make a bomb, even if there is a chemical means of separating out the plutonium as is is a mixtures of all the plutonium isotopes and only almost pure Pu-239 can actually explode. Using an IFR with pyroprocessing eventually consumes all the actinides as the first two streams are used to make new actinide pins. Here is a good review of fast reactors including the IFR: www.world-nuclear.org/info/Current-and-Future-Generation/Fast-Neutron-Reactors/
|
|