Some invaluable information on MOX Fuel reactors (1/2 hr mp3):

http://www.tucradio.org/MOX_ONE_OlsonCabasso.mp3

What would you expect from an associate of the IPA?

Meanwhile I much prefer the assessment of the nuclear situation altogether which can be found on this site:

http://www.llrc.org

Ho Hum - I looked at your post .. 417,000 cancers by 2061..

Bbbwwwhahahahah! Oh come now, didn't get a least a little sus when you saw the figure? There weren't that many cancers from Hiroshima, and not anything like that number from Chernobyl.. while that guy has an impressive title what's he's really on about is low level dosage.. that is, claims that very low level dosage will cause some proportionate increase in the background count of cancers.. rather than (as is generally believed) no change at all. He's pushing a barrow in other words.

Also note the long end date, when anyone who is middle aged at the time the disaster will be dead anyway - quite a few from cancers. Whether you could seperate even that enormous figure from background is an interesting question. Our good professor, also note, extended the "affected" site to 100 kms from the reactor which covers quite a lot of populated area.

It is amazing the total nonsense that turns up even in the refereed science in issues like this.

curmudgeon, I agree, the giveaway in Ho Hum's statement

"Meanwhile I much prefer ... on this site" .. I much prefer (doom! Please tax me harder!)

Says it all really, given the amount of available information, some people want the worst possible slant on things, and ignore the rest.

There is an excellent dosage graph from information is beautiful, I know xkcd did a great one as well, but IIB is selling theirs ($2.50) and all donations go to the Japanese disaster relief fund .. http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/2011/radiation-dosage-chart/ sorry, I usually don't post links but this is very good.

For information, and an objective outlook go to Prof. Barry Brooks site www.bravenewclimate.com , he's an AGW believer, but is honest and easy to work with, and knows his nuclear stuff.

For scaremongering and doomsaying, the usual sites you go to, like Ho Hum refers to above, I don't know any, since I avoid all the paid scaremongering shills.

If you have to get donations to stay in the doom business, of course you're going to pump out what sells to the fools who fund you .. more doom! It's like reports from the eco groups, surprisingly all predict doom and sea rise and drought, snow, storms, floods, starvation on and on.

Amazing that they always get the kind of report they commission?

No of course it's not surprising, wake up!

Amicus - some good stuff there.. been meaning to catvch up with Brooks site.. tnks..

The 64 thousnd dollar question is any of you pronuke guys willing to buy a house and raise a famly say 5 miles away from Fukushima? I get the feeling there will be some cheap land going?

No didn't think so.