John Shanahan, Editor of allaboutenergy.net and anonymous: It is important to exchange views about sensitive topics related to the use of energy without getting personal. Here are two views. What do you think?
T.D. Luckey: Evidence indicates an inverse relationship between chronic low-dose radiation levels and cancer incidence and/or mortality rates. Examples are drawn from: 1) state surveys for more than 200 million people in the United States; 2) state cancer hospitals for 200 million people in India; 3) 10,000 residents of Taipei who lived in cobalt-60 contaminated homes; 4) high-radiation areas of Ramsar, Iran; 5) 12 million person-years of exposed and carefully selected control nuclear workers; .. .. .. This evidence conforms to the hypothesis that adequate ionizing radiation protects against cancer and promotes health.
Llewellyn King - The great event of the nuclear calendar for 2011 was the earthquake and tsunami that hammered three reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi plant in Japan
If you are a nuclear power believer, these sturdy old machines proved their mettle. They withstood all that nature could throw at them, although terrible damage resulted from the loss of external power and the swamping of the emergency diesel generators.
The extraordinary thing about Fukushima is that although more than 15,000 Japanese died as the result of the earthquake and tsunami, no one died directly from the nuclear accident or from the release of radioactivity.
Petr Beckmann was one of the earliest engineering professors to take on the anti-nuclear establishment. Read the book review here for "Health Hazards of Not Going Nuclear." It is available at Amazon. For the price of shipping plus $0.01, it is a must have for all people supporting nuclear power. One reviewer says, "Dr. Beckman's energy book is still the most concise comparison of health hazards across multiple electrical generating technologies."