INTERESTING: Do we believe what we are being told?

Sunday, June 9, 2013

*** begin quote ***

Japan’s Radiation Disaster Toll: None Dead, None Sick
by Soulskill
An anonymous reader writes “This article discusses a recently-released U.N. Scientific Committee report which examined the health effects of the accident at the Fukushima nuclear plant. Their conclusion: ‘Radiation exposure following the nuclear accident at Fukushima-Daiichi did not cause any immediate health effects. It is unlikely to be able to attribute any health effects in the future among the general public and the vast majority of workers. … No radiation-related deaths or acute effects have been observed among nearly 25,000 workers involved at the accident site. Given the small number of highly exposed workers, it is unlikely that excess cases of thyroid cancer due to radiation exposure would be detectable.’ The article even sums up the exposure levels for the workers who were closest to the reactor: ‘Of 167 exposed to more than the industry’s recommended five-year limit of 100 mSv (a CT scan exposes patients to up to 10 mSv), 23 recorded 150-200 mSv, three 200-250 mSv and six up to 678 mSv, still short of the 1000 mSv single dosage that causes radiation sickness, or the accumulated exposure estimated to cause a fatal cancer years later in 5 per cent of people.’ The report also highlights the minute effect it’s had on the environment: ‘The exposures on both marine and terrestrial non-human biota were too low for observable acute effects.'”

*** end quote ***

I hope this correct and not “biased” by Gooferment.

If it is, then despite a huge blunder nuke energy makes sense.

Only if we trust the dikw (i.e., data, information, knowledge, wisdom) we are receiving, then we should be pushing nuke versus carbon as our civilization’s savior.

# – # – # – # – #   


TECHNOLOGY: Diesel is a better answer than gas – electric hybrids

Wednesday, January 5, 2011

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig11/peters-e8.1.1.html

New Year’s Wish List
by Eric Peters
EricPetersAutos.com

*** begin quote ***

More diesels

And fewer $40,000 hybrids that barely outdo the mileage of an ’80s-era Plymouth Champ. Diesels, unlike hybrids, work – if “working” means they deliver very high gas mileage without a very high price tag. Gas-electric hybrids and electric cars are impressive as technology but crap as consumer products – if the point of the exercise is to produce economical transportation. If you have to pay $30,000 or $40,000 (or even $25,000) to get 35 or 40 MPGs then MPGs don’t really matter since whatever you “save” in fuel costs is negated by the cost of the car itself. But diesel engines can deliver 60 MPG in a subcompact car that costs less than $15,000. Just not here. They have such cars in Europe. Santa needs to bring a few of them to us. But first, he’ll need to put some coal in the stockings of the government bureaucrats who have made the American car market unfriendly for diesel vehicles by imposing one regulatory obstacle and expense after the next. It’s not that diesels are “dirty” – the Europeans are just as obsessed with saving the planet as we are. It’s simply that our bureaucrats and politicians aren’t as smart as those in Europe.

*** end quote ***

I loved the three diesels I’ve had in my life.

Once upon a time, diesel fuel was cheaper than gasoline.

Don’t understand why that is? It’s easier to refine.

We know that the taxes on petrol of all flavors is a significant cost component. And, a good way for the Gooferment to bury taxes. With the illusion that it’s all going to “roads”, which is “barbara streisand”!

So why don’t we exploit technology that works?

# # # # #


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,049 other followers

%d bloggers like this: