Skip to main content

How to Stand Up to Helen Caldicott

Last week, I hinted that Dr. Helen Caldicott had gotten more than she had bargained for when she visited the University of South Carolina recently. Unfortunately, I failed to follow up and link to the following post at the Nuclear Literacy Project. The author is Kallie Metzger, a graduate fellow studying nuclear engineering at the University of South Carolina, and she deserves some applause for the way she conducted herself:
Ultimately, I hoped this presentation would provide a platform for discussion —And it did, but not nearly as peaceably as I envisioned. I imagined proponents of nuclear refuting the speaker’s false statements and exaggerations (respectfully, of course), the speaker conceding to our reasoning, and the whole night ending in a campfire kumbaya session between the opposing groups. Instead, Dr. Caldicott refused questions, became increasingly hostile and arrogant, and created a strained environment for everyone.
I could quote more, but that would be unfair to the team at Nuclear Literacy. Click here to read the rest right now.

Comments

jimwg said…
Re: "I could quote more, but that would be unfair to the team at Nuclear Literacy. Click here to read the rest right now."

Quote On! IMHO it's darn relevant to NL and other edu-blogs missions to have web surfers not only get enlightened on the virtues of nuclear power, but also see the harms' way pro-nukers as Kallie Metzger experience in tepidly hostile territory at forums and rallies. Indeed, it's rather a disservice to pro-nuclear advocates/prospective supporters not to give them a heads' up on the kind of implacable passions and demeaning scorn and "pop peer pressure" their views are going to get on campus and public venues. For prospective pro-nukers, odds are high that the human-interest story inclined/non-tech perspective leaning local media will cast coldly on nuclear issue (to say the least), and nil are TV shows mentioning nuclear in a good light if at all, so no air support backing-up your views and facts there, and local libraries will be showcasing books on windmills and tidal power while nuke stuff will be relegated to the closet like a naughty child. Here in NYC, school science fairs that have nuclear energy exhibits are as numerous as hen's teeth and even ubiquitous commercials featuring schools and student support groups sponsored by major corporations mention squat about nuclear, and anti-nukers know well this glaring absence contributes a depreciating lone-wolf effect that makes prospective pro-nukers wonder whether they're really "on the right side." I think the web surfer coming across a edu-blog like NL's should know, besides the standard nuclear green litany, the kind of cold shoulders and intolerance and irrationally fearsome attitudes they're up against. It's one thing for a student to hawk nuclear on clean air -- but that's NOT the issue others and anti's are going to shove in their faces; it will be "what happened at Fukushikma!" and "you don't care 'bout all the ray-de-a-shun cancer-ridden children!" and "nukes are all budging balloons that just can't wait to blow!!" Yea, Greenpeace-induced peer pressure is alive out there for school children because if you're green then you're the one wearing the white hat, not black like baddie Nuclear Man in Superman! (it's ironic to me that per-square-inch you find more pro-nuke hands-up at teen pageant judging than most any public school -- witnessed this twice!). IMHO, pro-nuke edu-blogs should not just educate about and promote nuclear energy, but also arm the newbie pro-nuke supporter and advocate in schools or public with ready facts and online resources and forum support to not just rebuff but challenge the very loud and patronizing opposition. Persuading young people to look reasonably on nuclear energy will be as tough a sell as getting them interested in the Boy/Girl Scouts over free passes to Disneyland.

Keep up the good fight, NL!

James Greenidge
Queens NY

Popular posts from this blog

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.


What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

A Billion Miles Under Nuclear Energy (Updated)

And the winner is…Cassini-Huygens, in triple overtime.

The spaceship conceived in 1982 and launched fifteen years later, will crash into Saturn on September 15, after a mission of 19 years and 355 days, powered by the audacity and technical prowess of scientists and engineers from 17 different countries, and 72 pounds of plutonium.

The mission was so successful that it was extended three times; it was intended to last only until 2008.

Since April, the ship has been continuing to orbit Saturn, swinging through the 1,500-mile gap between the planet and its rings, an area not previously explored. This is a good maneuver for a spaceship nearing the end of its mission, since colliding with a rock could end things early.

Cassini will dive a little deeper and plunge toward Saturn’s surface, where it will transmit data until it burns up in the planet’s atmosphere. The radio signal will arrive here early Friday morning, Eastern time. A NASA video explains.

In the years since Cassini has launc…