Since the earthquake and tsunami of March 2011 that killed 18,000 people and did $300 billion in damage to Japan environmentalists have avoided talking about the real source of the disaster – ‘mother’ nature.
‘Greenies’ have focused only on the Fukushima nuclear reactor that was damaged and that has leaked radiation since. Thus we might think that thousands or tens of thousands or millions of people have died from that radiation since 2011. But we would be wrong. Fox News recently reported:
The government of Japan acknowledged for the first time that a former worker of the Fukushima nuclear plant has died as a result of radiation exposure – seven years after the plant was hit by a tsunami.
It’s not clear when the man died, however the country’s health and labor ministry said the man died of cancer triggered by exposure to radiation and that his family should receive workers’ compensation, state broadcaster NHK reported.
This is the first plant worker – and even the first person – whose death has been attributed to the radiation leaking from the nuclear plant.
In short, the ‘greenies’ desperately needed as many radiation deaths as possible to make nuclear power look bad. Mention the word ‘Fukushima’ and the world recoils in horror from all of the negative ‘green’ propaganda.
Yet up to and after just one single death the ‘greenies’ continue their war on nuclear power even though it is the most efficient energy source ever developed.
Meanwhile the truth always has been and always will be that ‘mother’ nature is the most brutal killer of all (earthquakes, tsunamis, droughts, hurricanes, tornados, famine, heat, disease, cold, floods, etc.) while nuclear power plants save and improve millions of lives by generating electricity that helps us to have higher standards of living.
In 1979, Nikitas3.com visited the Three Mile Island nuclear plant site in Pennsylvania just a week after the accident there. From across the Susquehanna River I felt the radiation for a brief period and thought at the time that I would certainly die. But 39 years later I have never felt a single after-effect and there are no reported deaths from the TMI accident.
A 50-year-old nuclear plant in New Jersey recently was shut down. This is part of a string of shutdowns across the US that are being forced by the ‘greenies’. Germany is shutting down all of its nuclear plants. We are told that nuclear power is “dangerous”.
It is not. The most horrific nuclear power plant accident in the history of the world was an explosion at the reactor at Chernobyl in Ukraine in 1986. Environmentalists had claimed that such an accident would kill millions.
So guess how many people died at Chernobyl? Here are four possible answers and you must pick one before looking down at the next line for the answer:
*31 people died
*3,100 people died
*31 million people died
*31,000 people died
Give up? The answer is the first one: Thirty-one people died and this was at a reactor built by communists with no basic safeguards. So between Fukushima and Chernobyl we have 32 confirmed deaths in the 70-year history of civilian nuclear power generation around the world or more than 12,000 reactor-years of operation.
In comparison more than 700,000 gay American males have died of AIDS since 1981 and more than a million have been sickened. Yet there is no hysteria whatsoever on the left about homosexuality.
Chernobyl is even now a Ukraine tourist destination after environmentalists warned that it would be “uninhabitable for 10,000 years”.
And what do we have to replace the nuclear plants that are being shut down?
You guessed it… windmills and solar panels. Here are some excerpts from a report about a windmill in Massachusetts and a story from the Associated Press about that same wind generator. It was erected in 2007 near the top of a ski mountain called Jiminy Peak in Massachusetts to produce electricity for the ski area’s operations.
This windmill is huge. It produces 1.5 megawatts at peak output and is as tall as a 35-story building. Nikitas3.com calculates that the United States would need 2 million such windmills to power our nation and that they would be standing everywhere you looked across the country – towering over farm fields, cities, and towns, on mountaintops, across deserts, on the seashore, throughout wilderness areas, etc.
The reports says: The turbine is able to generate energy 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Nikitas3.com comment: This statement is a blatant deception. Yes, it is “able to” generate if the wind is blowing. But there are hardly any places in the world where the wind blows all day every day, even out in the ocean. But we need power all day every day.
Nikitas3.com has seen this Jiminy windmill many, many times sitting motionless. And that was just on occasions when I happened to be driving where I could see it from across a nearby lake.
‘Greenies’ also offer inflated figures to promote wind energy, for instance, they will say that a windmill is “expected to produce enough power for 2,500 homes”. But they never seem to tell us how much power the windmill actually puts out after it is installed. The reason is that windmills put out very little power and it would look bad if we knew the truth.
For instance the Jiminy windmill only produces enough electricity for about 400 homes (calculated from figures not reported in the media, but only on the ski area’s website). Thus the nearby city of Pittsfield would need fifty or more of these giant windmills for its electricity needs(!) Meanwhile Pittsfield has only one building taller than 6 stories. Imagine a forest of 35-story windmills in and around the city.
The report says: The (ski) resort will benefit from renewable energy production tax credits for 10 years.
Nikitas3.com comment: Sure, because the ‘greenies’ have rigged the system so that taxpayers subsidize the windmill with these credits. Otherwise it never would have been erected.
The report says: Wind turbines take up much less space than the average power facility.
Nikitas3.com comment: This is another deception. This one windmill may take up less space but it only produces a tiny fraction of the electricity of a power plant and only when the wind is blowing.
On the other hand you can see this windmill from 5 miles away on the mountaintop. It is a massive eyesore in a region noted for its natural beauty. This is one of the reasons that Americans have risen up against wind energy.
Associated Press reports: About 500 tons of parts and equipment had to be transported along a two-mile, 26-percent-grade road up the mountain, including 123-foot-long blades.
Nikitas3.com comment: They don’t mention the 1,000 ton concrete block needed for the windmill’s foundation that will be a permanent scar on the mountain top. In the final analysis, Nikitas3.com calculates that windmills use hundreds of times as much in resources for the same amount of power as a nuclear plant because you need thousands of windmills just to produce the same amount of electricity as one reactor.
That 500 tons also had to be hauled up the mountain, harming the environment. A permanent road is also needed to service the windmill. But no complaints from ‘greenies’ since they are getting rich on windmills. See the picture?
Associated Press reports: Bill Swersey, of Manhattan, N.Y., who has skied at the western Massachusetts resort on the New York border every year since the late 1970s, says the turbine is a powerful symbol of environmentally friendly skiing.
“I think that you sometimes feel like skiing is an indulgence sport. You know it uses a lot of energy between the lifts and the snowmaking and the lighting … and the fact that they can offset even some of it with wind energy is great,” said Swersey, a Web site manager.
Nikitas3.com comment: Oh, sure, another liberal environmentalist from New York City enjoying an energy-intensive hobby and then finding a way to rationalize it. Here is my advice to Swersey – give up skiing. It is harming the planet by consuming so much energy for your personal enjoyment. Lead by example.
The report says about the advantage of wind power: Wind is free.
Nikitas3.com comment: Sure, but the hardware to convert this “free” energy is very expensive.
The report says: Because wind turbines produce less electricity than the average fossil fueled power facility, more turbines have to be built.
Nikitas3.com comment: You bet. Nikitas3.com calculates that up to 2,000 of these massive windmills would be needed to replace one single nuclear reactor or coal-burning power plant.
Nikitas3.com also calculates that the maintenance costs for all of those windmills could be several thousand times the maintenance cost for the generators at a nuclear plant since there are so many windmills required and they would be scattered all over the mountains, perhaps over hundreds of miles.
The report says: The turbine does not produce much sound at 200 yards away, only that equivalent to a quiet whisper.
Nikitas3.com comment: Big deal. You can see the windmill 5 miles away. It is ugly.
The reports says: The construction of the wind turbine could cause turmoil amongst the community people because of conflicting views.
Nikitas3.com comment: It already has. Most Americans don’t want windmills near their homes including rich Massachusetts liberals on Cape Cod, including the Kennedys, who stopped an offshore wind project in the ocean.
The report says: Surrounding wildlife must be considered.
Nikitas3.com comment: Environmentalists consistently ignore the horrendous toll that windmills take on birds. Even endangered eagles are being killed by windmills in California. But look at this from nature-loving PBS.org (Public TV):
The Obama administration said Friday it will allow some companies to kill or injure bald and golden eagles for up to 30 years without penalty, an effort to spur development and investment in green energy while balancing its environmental consequences.
The change, requested by the wind energy industry, will provide legal protection for the lifespan of wind farms and other projects for which companies obtain a permit and make efforts to avoid killing the birds. An investigation by The Associated Press earlier this year documented the illegal killing of eagles around wind farms, the Obama administration’s reluctance to prosecute such cases and its willingness to help keep the scope of the eagle deaths secret.
The Daily Signal reports:
Estimates vary widely on the collateral damage to eagles, bats and birds that tangle with wind turbines. A recent Wildlife Society survey estimated 1.4 million bat and bird fatalities annually, including 83,000 raptors. In the past five years, wind farms have destroyed at least 67 eagles, mostly golden eagles, according to a 2013 government report.
Yet if an oil company kills one single sparrow the ‘greenies’ want a federal investigation.