Dear Tena

I disagree. You are extremely important. The nuclear industry has much to do with your past and much to do with your future and that of your children.

When you have pro-nuclear spin doctors condescendingly advising: “The following links will get you started in understanding the Nuclear Energy Industry. The site is both independent and accountable…”

Rest assured the deception continues for the World Nuclear Association is NOT independent nor held to account, but represents the beast itself, his false prophets and their progeny:

“Current WNA Members are responsible for virtually all of world uranium, conversion, and enrichment production and some 95% of the world's nuclear-generated electricity outside the USA (85% of world nuclear generation, including the USA ).” (WNA)

The following is what the Beast would have you believe:

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf50.html

The facts are different. These excerpts are taken at random from a massive file I have gathered over 30 years:

1. Mt Walton in WA has a shallow grave unmanned repository for low level radioactive waste. The Health Department’s release of the final report in 1993 (No.93/26) includes 4 items of plutonium.

2. "The US spent over $52 billion on nuclear weapons and related programs in the fiscal year 2008, but only 10 percent of that went toward preventing a nuclear attack."

3. "Pakistan's leading nuclear scientist confessed on national television to leaking the country's nuclear secrets.This is what AQ Khan did in Pakistan:

"He stole designs for centrifuges and for a centrifuge plant when he was working in Holland. He was in Holland in the '70s, stole these blueprints, brought them to Pakistan, gave them to Pakistan. That enabled Pakistan then to build its nuclear bomb. He then took those same blueprints and other things he'd acquired, and he went around the world selling that know-how and these designs. The AQ Khan network secretly passed on nuclear technology to Libya, North Korea and Iran."

4. 1997: “Exceptional elevation of children's leukemia appearing 5 years after the 1983 startup of the Krümmel nuclear power plant Germany, accompanied by a significant increase of adult leukemia cases":

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1469929

Contd……

Contd……

5. 2008: CHILD LEUKEMIA DEATH RATES INCREASE NEAR U.S. NUCLEAR PLANTS:

http://www.radiation.org/press/pressrelease081111ejcc_leukemia.html

6. From 1993 to 2001, the IAEA tracked 175 cases of trafficking in nuclear materials and 201 cases of trafficking in radioactive materials used for medical and industrial purposes.

7. 2007: “ Twenty years after a blast in the nuclear plant at Chernobyl spread radioactive debris across Europe, it has been revealed that 375 farms in Britain, with 200,000 sheep, are still contaminated by fallout after two decades, the legacy of the Chernobyl disaster is still casting its poisonous shadow over Britain's countryside.

"The Department of Health has admitted that more than 200,000 sheep are grazing on land contaminated by fallout from the explosion at the Ukrainian nuclear plant 1,500 miles away. Emergency orders still apply to 355 Welsh farms, 11 in Scotland and nine in England as a result of the catastrophe in April 1986.

“Some of the Scottish hills are also still affected. No sheep can be moved out of any of these areas without a special licence, under Emergency Orders imposed in 1986. Sheep that have higher than the permitted level of radiation have to be marked with a special dye that does not wash off in the rain, and have to spend months grazing on uncontaminated grass before they are passed as fit to go into the food chain.”

8. “Since 1945, the United States has manufactured and deployed more than 70,000 nuclear weapons to deter and if necessary fight a nuclear war. Up to 1998, bases and facilities with significant current or historical U.S. nuclear weapons or naval nuclear propulsion missions, in and out of the US, reveal that the Nuclear weapons facilities have occupied over 10,018,628.70 acres of land:

http://www.brookings.edu/projects/archive/nucweapons/basesize.aspx

9. WASHINGTON, DC, August 5, 2008 (ENS) - It will cost 38 percent more to build, operate and decommission the nation's first nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada than the federal government estimated seven years ago, the U.S. Department of Energy said today in an updated life cycle cost estimate of $96.2 billion.

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/aug2008/2008-08-05-091.asp

A major problem. The Genie is already out of the bottle. No stopping nuclear power now even if America did destroy North Korea and Iran. That is unless non-nuclear alternatives can be developed very quickly.
My preference would have been that nuclear power had been by-passed for alternatives such as solar and wave power, but it wasn't.
One possibility is to develop alternative power sources very quickly and give it to developing and other countries that need it. Or possible give safe nuclear technology (if it exists) to countries that need it.
I do realise that giving something away that could help everyone instead of using to make mega-bucks for a few is a radical idea. I am not talking about communism or any other ideology. It is just that to my non-political mind it seems sensible to give away something that is safe rather than let very dodgy technology become a problem for the whole world.
Even if developed countries develop safe nuclear power it is still of no use unless everyone has safe nuclear power. That is one of my concerns. If there is safe nuclear power everyone must have it, or it is not safe.
Unless America's stance on nuclear power for North Korea, Iran and others changes it makes no difference how safe our nuclear technology is. America will force countries who need power into some very dated and dodgy technologies unless it is prepared to give technology away. That technology could easily be technology that cannot produce nuclear weapons.
This is of course a dream. I cannot see America giving anything to anybody for free

Yes, Germany donated (i.e., "for free") to Indonesia nuclear technology shouted down by green fanatics at home. The area of the free technology's application has been transformed from arid and poor to fertile and rich - a success story. The people concerned in such success couldn't give a toss what western green degenerates believe.

So-called "alternative" power generation is inefficient and unreliable; to even suggest propagating its use in the developing world is like saying: "let them weave baskets".

France and Sweden have been relying on nuclear power for decades as their main sources of electricity, and n.p.