Introduction

      It might surprise you to learn that:

 

  •  ·   An American has a better chance of being shot by their own dog, than being harmed by nuclear power. (Chapter 3)

 

·      More people die each year working on rooftop solar and wind turbines, than have ever died from sixty years of nuclear power. (Chapter 6)

 

·     You’d get more radiation flying from the US to Ukraine, than from taking a tour of the Chernobyl exclusion zone. (Chapter 14)

 

·      The average dose received by anyone downwind from Three Mile Island was equal to one chest X-ray. (Chapter 6)

 

·     If no one had evacuated Fukushima, the maximum downwind dose would have been equal to one CT scan.  (Chapter 1)

 

·    The false estimate of 4,000 future deaths from Chernobyl was based on a 1927 experiment, conducted before low levels of radiation could be accurately detected and measured. (Chapter 9)

 

·      The bad science that came from this work – that there is no safe dose of radiation, and that all doses are cumulative – is widely accepted as fact, even to this day.  (Chapter 7)

 

This book is a challenge to our fellow environmentalists to re-evaluate their position on nuclear power. Too many of us seem to believe that it's a fate worse than global warming, and that we must devise a national clean-energy solution based entirely, or mostly, on renewables instead.

 

Ideas are being offered and debates are being waged on the best way to get the world to Carbon Zero by 2050. That's a good first step, but our carbon emissions will eventually have to be less than zero, something known as Carbon Negative, to undo the damage from two centuries of burning carbon fuel. 

 

Whatever technologies we ultimately use to remove excess carbon from the atmosphere and oceans, this much is certain: Carbon Zero isn’t enough. Even if the world stopped burning all carbon fuels today, we've already put enough CO2 in the atmosphere to risk a warmer and chaotic climate for the next several hundred years. We have to go Carbon Negative, not just Carbon Zero.

 

The world will require a stupendous amount of clean energy to achieve Carbon Zero. And then we’ll need even more energy to go Carbon Negative, to restore the world’s pre-industrial climate. And this energy will have to be produced above and beyond the energy we'll need to run the machinery of civilization. And, all of it must be carbon-free.

 

Passions are running high, because the decisions we make today will affect the future of civilization as we know it. That's usually just a figure of speech, but in this case it's all too real. Complicating matters is the fact that climate science has become a political chew toy, especially in the United States.

 

But this issue is beyond politics, or should be. The excess CO2 that's warming the planet and acidifying the oceans is a real and worsening crisis, regardless of anyone's political persuasion. So if all this climate stuff sounds alarming, that's good. If you're not alarmed, you're not paying attention.

 

 

https://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2010/11/10/the-physics-of-global-warming

The science is the science, and most of it comes down to basic physics and chemistry. How to best respond is the only productive point of debate. As we see it, the best response, with the least disruption to society, would be a rapid buildout of nuclear power. 

 

Renewables are fine, but they’re not enough – the staggering amount of clean energy we’ll need in the years ahead is almost beyond comprehension. So if we’re really serious about building a carbon-free world, nuclear power must be  part of the equation.

 

"Fear of a Nuclear Planet" (FNP) is the first book in our series on clean energy, in which we address radioactivity, nuclear fear, spent fuel and nuclear waste. 

 

"Roadmap to Nowhere" (RTN) is the second book, a nuts-and-bolts comparison of a proposed 100% renewables grid, with a hypothetical 100% nuclear grid.

 

"Power to the Planet" (PTP) will be the third book, where we geek out and explore nuclear physics, nuclear power, various reactor designs, thorium, liquid fuel vs. solid fuel, and more.

 

The first edition of RTN has been available online since December 2017. We're revising the book in light of new information, but our thesis and conclusions remain the same. In fact, they're now more compelling than ever. 

 

Though we wrote RTN first, this book (FNP) is the first one to read if you have any serious concerns about radiation, nuclear energy, waste, spent fuel, proliferation, nuclear medicine, or all of the above.


Over the last half-century, nuclear power has attracted more than its fair share of scare stories, cherry-picked facts, and misplaced concerns. The misunderstandings that result have impeded efforts to solve the world's energy crisis. In our view, the biggest obstacle to finding common ground on clean energy can be summed up in two words: nuclear fear.


So first things first.