I'm glad that this drama is finally coming to a close.
People are arguing that going forward with the release will be harmful to nuclear's image, and increase public fears (refusal to buy fish, etc.). I have the opposite view. 1/8
Conversation
Replying to
As long as an issue is not resolved (still being debated, etc..), it's still a story and remains in the headlines. Once the decision has been made and the action is taken, there's no longer a story to tell, and it fades from the headlines. 2/8
1
28
It's clear that public fears scale with media coverage, as opposed to objective science. Case in point is how there seems to be little concern anymore about the main (2011) ocean release, even though it's radioactivity was infinitely larger than this negligible release. 3/8
1
29
Even the (tiny) residual radioactivity from the 2011 release is many orders of magnitude larger than any associated with this release, but no one is talking about it or concerned about it. B/c it's no longer discussed in the press (since no decisions are being made). 4/8
2
22
Are we to understand that people resumed eating the fish despite any residual radioactivity from 2011, but will stop doing so b/c of THIS (negligible) release?! That makes no sense! What matters is that it's being talked about in the media, and that will soon stop. 5/8
1
22
I will finish by airing two complaints. The "concerns" being voiced by South Korea, China and the Pacific Islands Forum are clearly in bad faith, and that disgusts me. They clearly have a scientist or two on staff... 6/8
1
25
And then there's the article's author. Characterizing facts (that the water is harmless, or even that it will be treated before release) as debatable industry/govt. assertions. Why in the name of God is "treated" in quotes?? It WILL be (or HAS been) treated! 7/8
1
1
25
This is another example of the prejudices that nuclear still faces. An analogy would be to characterize statements that renewables are clean as industry assertions (putting "clean" in quotes). And following up with a description of "concerns" about wind turbine cancer. 8/8
1
1
25
Replying to
They shouldn't be allowed to release a single drop until I've gotten my share. :D
4
Replying to
If more people stopped eating fish from this, it would be good. The Japanese fishing industry, among others, has been decimating fish and marine mammal stocks, while ignoring their mercury levels, largely coming from coal smoke.
2
2
Replying to
Thank for the BOD, but we all know there will be environmental zealots that will try to paint this as a horrific existential threat.
1