Three Mile Island was worse than people were told

[Lenzabi]

Seems that they (the government and Nuclear Industry) lied about the levels and doses of radiation TMI=Three Mile Island emitted when it went wacko

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/04/03/716139/-Startling-revelations-on-Three-Mile-Island-nuclear-power?detail=email

A special Facing South investigation by Sue Sturgis

It was April Fool's Day, 1979 -- 30 years ago this week -- when Randall Thompson first set foot inside the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant near Middletown, Pa. Just four days earlier, in the early morning hours of March 28, a relatively minor problem in the plant's Unit 2 reactor sparked a series of mishaps that led to the meltdown of almost half the uranium fuel and uncontrolled releases of radiation into the air and surrounding Susquehanna River.



It was the single worst disaster ever to befall the U.S. nuclear power industry, and Thompson was hired as a health physics technician to go inside the plant and find out how dangerous the situation was. He spent 28 days monitoring radiation releases.

Today, his story about what he witnessed at Three Mile Island is being brought to the public in detail for the first time -- and his version of what happened during that time, supported by a growing body of other scientific evidence, contradicts the official U.S. government story that the Three Mile Island accident posed no threat to the public.

[Agartha]

I'll read when I'm back home, too long, but very interesting!!

[Agartha]

Wow.... long read but worth it..... we will never know the truth. Governments lie and cover up all the time, who knows what the truth is.

Despite many incidents like this one, Chernobyl, etc, nuclear power is still deemed safe...... but I'd love to see if politicians or those that own the nuclear plants, would have the guts to live near them just like many people do. I bet they wouldn't.

All forms of energy production have their costs.. and we are energy addicts.... hence why we are killing the planet.

[Rockhopper]

Yep and the Newbridge one in the UK too.

Nuke stations are built away out in the countryside never in a city where the power is needed, I wonder why that is? Rhetorical question!

Nuke stations are not particularly efficient either. They need a large supply of electricity to operate and the power has to be from the outside.

Generally they add just a little to what they use: 800Mw in 1Gw out is the standard.

Tim.

[Lenzabi]

That is due to instead of relatively harmless Thorium, they are powered by toxic Uranium, which can make more toxic Plutonium. Nuclear power plants all are only able to give 30% max to the grid, why? Bomb making. Or rather Bomb fuel, aka Plutonium.

Most of our aging Nuke sites are Cold War era Reactors.

[Rockhopper]

Yep Len. If the effort went into alternative nukes we would have Fusion Reactors by now.

Tim.

[Lenzabi]

Or at least safer thorium ones, but in either case, they decided that the bombs were the more important things than actual power. America, Britain, France, Russia and China and other nations decide they wanted in on the Nuke-club.

Germany is working on not needing the ones they have and switched mostly to solar and wind, which they get plenty enough of both.

Damned Cold War.

[Sponsored content]