Thom Hartmann: Nuclear Power - We almost Lost Nebraska

[ZombieMovProductions]

Really WE ALMOST LOST NEBRASKA! Come on you could start using that phrase when the plant was filled with water! What is wrong with media! And coal power plants cause way more problems, kill way more people, and release a lot more radiation into our environment! Sure there may be better things then nuclear like wind and solar but nuclear is far better then coal and oil and it should always have a place in our power grids.

[d2099y]

Doesn't anyone find it funny that all of a sudden Niclear power plants are all going to explode. Between 1974-1978 the New York Times had annual entries numbering 120 for car accidents which caused 50,000 deaths per year and 50 entries for Industrial accidents which caused 12,000 deaths per year. Radiation had 200 entries per year and caused zero deaths. The media love speading fear and preying on peoples imaginations, it sells a lot of papers and air time. Coal emits 200 times the radiation

[d2099y]

Since March 2011 Nuclear shutdown, Germany’s power imports from Poland increased by 500 MW a day.Poland hopes Germany will continue this trend, which is boosting its power sector and its coal industry. Poland generates 90% of electricity using coal and the Polish PM said that Germany’s decision will put coal back on the agenda. The capabilities of renewbles have been exagerated in the past which is why Denmark, Germany and the US has mandated their use by law.

[XaMitV]

Nobody cares about us Nebraskans. D:

[Ganseblumchen12]

nuclear-false-flag-alert in USA before 911 anniversary

[2110kop]

Yea NO MORE NUKES

If so, then what ?

Answer: Star Scientific's Muon Catalysed Fusion

"Unlike current fission nuclear reactors, there are no fissionable materials such as uranium and plutonium used to generate energy through muon catalysed fusion, so there is no possibility of an accident, leak or meltdown"

See their website - Star Scientic Limited

blog "The Big Picture by Andrew Horvath

Youtube video "In The Footsteps of Fusion"

Safe clean abundant cheap energy

[GamerWithTheEnemy]

Hey good news can come out of this. With a no-fly zone over the plant at least residents will have some blue chemtrail-free skies. We in Northern Illinois are not that lucky. Our skies are milky 6 days out of the week!

Hey gov't ... we need a no fly zone too !!

[rsmarkster]

Your comparing apples to oranges in this, japans plant got flooded with 10 feet of water in 3 minutes. This plant was aware of the Missouri river flooding months before it did. Your scare tactics to get views are truly disgusting.

[cagelsthrough]

Way to go Germany...any nation that wants to do a country some wickedness can just simply throw a bomb on your nuclear plant and that's it for you

[AreaParis]

STOP NUCLEAR POWER IN AMERICA NOW- IT IS THE NUMBER ONE THREAT TO NATIONAL SECURITY, BAR NONE. Please write a comment to Barack Obama's 2012 Presidential Campaign site asking him and the Democratic Party to change their position on supporting nuclear power now. Time to put the pressure on. thanks for your action and help...

[bluecode320]

@AreaParis No it isn't. Do you think that power plants and refineries packed with flammable gases and liquids are safer? Do you think that oil rigs and fracking rigs are safer?

[rahxephon52]

nnno nnouu noo more new nukes.

[mphello]

Why don't I hear about solar power and wind farms needing a ton of water, and needing endless baby sitting after a tsunami or flood or earthquake, or needing endless babysitting of "waste" from solar and wind farms?

Why isn't THAT in the news?

Oh .. wait.. because there ISN'T any!

[mphello]

Hey - religious nuts: you're not helping with your appeal to bullshit fantasies and delusions like "god" or Zeus or Isis or whatever female deity you worship.

[auanon]

"We almost lost Nebraska over the weekend."

Are you serious? I mean, really, like you're really not-laughing-on-the-inside-at-­all-of-the-people-who-are-watc­hing-you-and-actually-believe-­this-junk serious? Ridonkulous.

[flegmanbogesz]

this guy is an @ss, comparing fort calhoun to fukushima is bullcrap, saying that "we almost los Nebraska" is plain lie. Intentionally forgetting to mention that Fort Calhoun is shut down since April 9 for maintenance/refuelling is lying.

[Number1BadBoyInnit]

This video is total rubbish. Fukushima was buried under 16 feet of water in ten seconds and with no warning - Fort Calhoun may be under 1 foot of water after a month-long predictable rising of a river. Even a child can see these are totally different situations, so for a 'news' outlet like Russia Today to run this stuff is just despicable scaremongering.

[alexhn555]

@Number1BadBoyInnit That's one of the reason why anti-nuclear groups fail to get reckonized as a credible source of information by the scientific bodies: It's always armageddon and if you bother to prepare, you'll be doing this for nothing almost everytime.

All that stuff isn't helping, some plants are safer then others.

[srkh28]

Until there is something, anything to replace them, all you will get is dont rock the boat, keep your head down, your just another fool in the crowd.

[jbheffernan]

Mr. Hartmann failed to mention that Fort Calhoun has been in cold shutdown since April for refueling. Fukushima was running when the earthquake hit. We will not lose Nebraska if Fort Calhoun is flooded because of the current state of the plant. Decay heat at Fort Calhoun is at a lower levels and therefore more easily dealt with. The presentation of Mr. Hartmann is an example of unbalanced reporting.

[alexhn555]

@jbheffernan I just think people need to know the worsts case scenarios because, in their minds, it's always worst then you can imagine. So giving a idea of what a worst case could be can calm them (surprisingly).

[adam3176]

This is all SABOTAGE By Illuminati for Depopualtion.. and to Demonize Nuke power.. Its all about Demonizing Nukeclear power SO the ELITE can get us on there CARBON TAX,, this whole thing is a scam

[adam3176]

JAPAN USA Illuminati Secret weapons Doing False flag , SABOTAGE for Depopulation.. Media is all Illuminati paper TV, its all Staged.. so wake up PEOPLE. WAKE UP

[reactorsafetypros]

We used to think that the river could not flood that high. This is the second "500 Year" Flood in 15 years. What used to be good enough is no longer the case. The world is changing rapidly and we are no longer ready for it.

[edarrell2]

Mr. Hartmann: I'm disappointed that you appear to have been suckered in by what is, as best I can tell, a Pakistani hoax. Seriously: Can you find the Russian report that the Pakistani news outlet claimed was the source of the trouble report? I can't.

No-fly zones were declared over every U.S. nuclear power generating plant in September 2001, and they still stand. The recent FAA notice reminded pilots: Look up the blog, Millard Fillmore's Bathtub, get the facts and links.

[NorthWestRegionRep]

WHAT THE FUCK!!!!!!!!

HOW DUMB CAN YOU BE BY PUTTING NUCLEAR PLANTS IN THOSE AREAS!!

STOP NUCLEAR ENERGY!!

[melvin6767]

I don't hold any resentment toward science, or engineers. However; I've noticed that when facilities, or products are designed with regard to the earth, one factor isn't taken into a account. Some say God,others will say Mother Nature. Take your pick. This is the X factor,(the unpredictable factor) and Nature just is, we can learn to live with it and work with it, because when we try to work against it, humanity will always be on the losing side of the equation.

[thetruthisoutnow]

I give us another 20 years. by then we should have at least 10 to 20 melt downs. there are already 63 nuclear power plants in the US alone that are leaking radiation into the ground water due to age.

[Mariofan14832]

Im moving to germany

[alexhn555]

@Mariofan14832 Next to France.

[antoniac1234]

@Mariofan14832 Me too man, me too.

[ragingComputer]

Here's the incriminating info right on OPPD's site! ht tp:// w ww.op pd.c om /A bou tUs/ 22_007105

[CertainlyNotElks]

This is such an exaggeration though. The plants in Nebraska have more security against this than JUST a rubber wall...he makes it sound like they are a bunch of idiots, when in reality, they prepare for this, which is why it was "no big deal" that the flood waters were so high...

[Pralinenliebe]

@CertainlyNotElks

At the moment there is just a mobile dam. It´s a tube which they filled with water to make it heavy. Its material is rubber.

So he was right. It is a rubber wall if one wants to put it in bad words.

They are not a bunch of idiots. They knew that something like that could happen. That´s why they had a mobile protection in their storage.

But I don´t get it, why they didn´t built a protection but insteat relaying on a mobile wall? It´s definitly not the best way of protection.

[alexhn555]

@Pralinenliebe I think the walls, in concrete, do offer some protection, but that may ruin the plant or damage more the plant.

Whatever options they choose, I think they can put the fuel out of the reactor. In that case, they just need to watch the pool... and the whole plant, I can't know what water can carry out of this, that can sure look like a huge "tritium leak".

[Pralinenliebe]

@alexhn555

You cannot just remove the fuel out of the reactor. It´s too hot.

First you have to do a cold shut down. Then you let it cool down and after a while you can put it into the pool. But it is still very, very hot + needs to be cooled down constantly.

There it can still come to an over critical accident causing an explosion (happend in reactor 3 of Fukushima). The pool offers much less protection (f.e. no security building)!

Besides, your English is a little bit hard to understand...

[alexhn555]

@Pralinenliebe My english suck, I'm french (end aside). But I recall they refuel the reactor in about 30 days. Now to do that, aren't they removing the fuel from the core? Fort Calhoun is off since 33 days.

Once a meltdown occur it screw up the fuels racks, so it's no more doable, but before that, I don't know. I don't work here.

[almostcapecod]

@CertainlyNotElks If nuclear plants are so safe then how come NO insurance company in the world will insure one. They are insured by the federal government if you call that insurance.

[thetruthisoutnow]

@almostcapecod - Excellent point!

[alexhn555]

@almostcapecod They aren't so safe, thats a bad one. Pro-nuclear people and others from the industry keep telling it's safer then coal, oil or gas, not that it's 100% safe. You make choices, weigh benefits and risks.

Of course it's dangerous when it's dangerous, otherwise it's very good. Overall, that gives good statistics.

[theoldgeek1]

Surely - here in the United States we're a lot more careful with where we build OUR nuclear plants right??

Does anyone here knows the meaning of the word PORKING ?

[PtAltmVansanTarr]

I'm starting a blog called NebraskaNukeWatch.blogspot to try and wade through the BS to the facts. For example the nofly zone was created in part because of power lines being put up to back up the cooling system in the plant to prevent a Fukushima meltdown

[longboardinman]

OMG!! we need to act fast!!! take away my Liberty so I can be safe n sound... lol

[maricopaapt14]

It's June 22nd, 2011 and in Indiana, this is the first I have heard of the threat of flooding a Nuclear Plant, so I am a little pissed it isn't in the news. Sounds Like BP all over again.

[deadstarzx]

yet still none of our local news reports jack on the plant. everything is "its fine, it looks bad but its really not" yeah right. We're supposed to get even more water come Sunday thanks for releases at Gavins dam to 160,000 cfcs. Id at least like to be in the know.

---Sincerely,

Flooding in Iowa and Nebraska

[ithinkincode]

I hate it when news casters try to create public panic. That plant has already been shutdown.

[mycamguy]

@ithinkincode Yeah, Just like Fukushima safely shut down all of their reactors immediately after the tsunami hit, so no worries, right?

[ithinkincode]

@mycamguy We had a little more time to prepare for it this time.

[mycamguy]

@ithinkincode Well, I really hope you're right.

[Tylermcnamar]

why dont we use cold fussion and magnetics

[VideoExpostulations]

Or are our heads really that far up our Ass. well, yes, yes they are.

[amzuel420]

Revelation is giving people "a notification of an unusual events" too. And...I'd agree that it's "time to prepare". But I think one could do that best by getting their lives in order with the Creator. You can buy all the gold in Fort Knox and save water till you live on an island and it's not gonna help you survive what's coming.because there's not enough water in the universe to put out the fires of hell. You wanna prepare for the coming disaster? Find salvation with the Creator.

[offthahook08]

Aint no Ice melt, they are pruposely blowing up the levees like they did in Katrina... The army core of engineers is mossad!!!! These guys are predictble and they use the same tactics over and over again... The problem is, is the sheeple believe the Tel-Lie-Vision so much, that they are led to believe that they are the problem, when its really them that are the problem... What mind control, they dont need the chip the sheeple are already mind Effed...

[offthahook08]

The thing is to make it look natural, so that if anyone spoke out they would be looked at as crazy and easily debunked....

[allies67]

@S0up3rD0up3r yes wind is free and solar is free, just like coal, oil and uranium. Nature provides all of the resources, the problem is the cost of turning natural resources into electricity. Beyond the exorbitant cost of green energy is the problem of viability over the course of the day, the sun does not always shine on the solar arrays and the wind does not always blow at the wind farm.  It would be great if you knew something about the subject before you shoot your mouth off.

[99Eternal]

@allies67 " the problem is the cost of turning natural resources into electricity."

Windfarms cost less per KW than nuclear. FACT. That's not even factoring in the waste of nuclear, simply construction & maint.

"the wind does not always blow at the wind farm."

Right, but the wind always blows somewhere. Certain US States have enough wind energy to power the entire country on their own. That's not a realistic, logistical goal but the point remains, easily doable.

Then there's risk..

[allies67]

The problem at Fukashima is not water, it is lack of water. The cooling tank that holds the fuel rods was cracked by the earthquake and the loss of electricity caused by the the electrical grid in the area being destroyed by the tsunami. So what is your alternative, coal? uggh yucky carbon! hydro electric? now there is a thought for a flood prone area! wind and solar? boy, if we could only afford to subsidize more useless green technology!

[99Eternal]

@allies67 "The problem at Fukashima is not water, it is lack of water. "

Half truth. They would not have an issue whatsoever had the WATER from the tsunami not disabled all back-up generators and most electrical control.

" was cracked by the earthquake and the loss of electricity caused by the the electrical grid in the area being destroyed by the tsunami."

Incorrect, nuclear plantas are designed to operate off the grid, it was the WATER that disabled their GENERATORS.

D'OH!

[99Eternal]

@allies67 "So what is your alternative, coal? uggh yucky carbon! hydro electric? now there is a thought for a flood prone area! wind and solar?"

"Yucky" carbon? You'd prefer radioactive, carcinogenic, DNA altering plutonium, cesium, uranium?

I'm not a fan of coal but...lol?

"boy, if we could only afford to subsidize more useless green technology!"

We seem to be maintaining our nuclear programs, which cost more per KW generated than Wind...D'OH!

[PhatPhat818]

if you watch any mainstream news in america ...you are a fucking moron.

[PhatPhat818]

hey static you stupid fuck, you ever think nuclear energy was a bad idea in the first place you fucking clone. lets build nuke plants on faults and near oceans so WHEN NOT IF they all fail it will kill off masses of people=easier to control. well they wont take me alive. costs are irrelevant in a world where money is printed out of thin air you fucking moron wake up, or plz killurself...plz plz plz

[PhatPhat818]

fucking slave americans, were all fucked unless we all wake up, so if ur not awake ur a target. wake the fuck up or blow your brains out please so we dont have to tell you how stupid you are every fucking day...static im talkin to you

[Staticjumper]

"We almost lost Nebraska over the weekend"? LOL Yeah Tom, that 9.0 earthquake and tsunami that hit Omaha did a lot of damage. Gee, why do we build power plants next to water? Because nuclear power plants need a lot of .. wait for it ... WATER! Germany closing nuclear power plants and using solar instead? No, they're building more "clean" coal plants and importing electricity from Poland because of unfounded fears. When it comes to scaremongering and outright ignorance, Toms the BEST!

[austjb]

Well, the only thing more trustworthy than the U.S. government is the Russian government, right?

[trajan74]

The future belongs to fusion.

[ufozmankato]

Sure took a while to get this out...........Are the journalists all on a tight leash??

[amberb57]

@ufozmankato There's been a government ordered news blackout for this. No one in athuority is allowed to talk about it, so no information is getting out.

[ufozmankato]

@amberb57 I know....Sounts like RT is bragging for finally talking about it 14 days late...

[alexhn555]

@ufozmankato You don't want panic, don't you?

Unfortunately, I would like too more information, but it looks like they got their hands full. I hate when people watch my work, it's stressing.

[edarrell2]

@alexhn555, look up Millard Fillmore's Bathtub, see the posts on the Nebraska nuclear plants there.

[alexythimia7]

yeah thats right, just insult them after disaster. as if America is guilt free, look at the flooding that they knowingly did that has now enveloped 2 nuclear plants.

[megagagnon1]

Wind and Solar can't cut it - way too expensive. Safer more modern nukes are the answer.

[wateryskipper]

@megagagnon1 You´re ignorant by not seeing the problem. Nature can distroy the brilant technology of the nucs. If a nuc is out of controle, its a big problem. it doesn´t matter if it´s caused by an earthquake or a flood.

Nucs in US were not built on save grounds like in Japan.Nucs are never completly save! They are a potential hazard for humanity + natur.But since nobody knows how to store the waste, we don´t need to discuss this isue any further but just to switch of all of them.

[S0up3rD0up3r]

@megagagnon1 you know why no one charges you to breathe? because air is THAT abundant. So is solar, wind, geothermal, tidal, and all other forms of clean renewable energies. The only issue holding us back is people's perception of the outdated notion of money apparently.

[megagagnon1]

@S0up3rD0up3r So if solar cost 20x as much as oil, you think that would be a useful energy source?

[99Eternal]

@megagagnon1 Where I live, solar energy is an investment. You pay a large sum up front, but within 5-10 years you will have paid off that cost not only because of the "free energy" you get, but because Utilities in my area pay 80cents per KWH fed into the grid. We pay 5-9centsper KWH for energy from the grid, depending on time of use.

You also need to understand supply & demand. If 99% of people were on wind&solar, instead of on oil, the cost would drop dramatically.

[OcksmallMike]

@99Eternal

It appears you know nothing about supply and demand. How exactly does increasing the demand drop the cost? Increasing the supply decreases cost. Wow.

[99Eternal]

@OcksmallMike Increasing the supply means the person creating the product has more money invested and will need to sell at a higher cost to at least cover production - unless they have the DEMAND to meet the supply.

When you have a high demand for a product, you are able to sell it for a LOWER price because you are SELLING MORE because there is MORE DEMAND.

If you have no DEMAND, you aren't selling anything....

Are you beginning to understand how supply and demand effects prices?

[99Eternal]

@OcksmallMike Let me make it easy for you. Lets compare a low demand of say 10 sales per year to a high demand of 1000 sales per year.

Your item costs you $20ea to produce. You are selling them for $30.

1) Low Demand - 10 customers per year x $10 profit per sale = $100 per year

2) high demand - 1000 customers per year x $10 profit per sale = $10000 per year.

Who do you think can afford to lower prices to encourage even more sales??

Exactly......

[99Eternal]

@OcksmallMike If both of these people in my example produced the same number of product, ie have the same production cost. They each had the exact same target in mind etc, but one of them had high demand and made $10,000. This person could have sold his products for $21 each, while the person with low demand sells for $30, and the person with high demand would have made $1,000 while the person with low demand made only $100 - BECAUSE HE HAD NO DEMAND and SURPLUS SUPPLY.

Don't thank me ;)

[S0up3rD0up3r]

@megagagnon1 We only have so much oil left on this planet which is still causing uninhabitable conditions. We have another couple billion years until the sun burns out, and it does not pollute whatsoever.

So how many more oil-based wars does it take to get through your thick skull that we need something new? Solar is just one of the abundant resources out there, and it's propaganda that makes you think we cannot afford to tap into it.

[allies67]

The Russian government should know about nuclear disasters they have plenty of experience causing them.

[indegruv]

Enough of this DUMB technology. BIG DUMB WATER HEATER! There is OBVIOUSLY a SAFER, BETTER way forward. Enough of this nonsense, and ENOUGH OF YOU PRO-NUCLEAR EXCUSE MAKERS. RADIOACTIVE WASTE, DO YOU UNDERSTAND?

[moonbaby625]

A foot and a half of water cannot be compared to the earthquakes in Japan....purely ignorant to compare the two! 

[Pralinenliebe]

@moonbaby625

You´re ignorant by not seeing the problem.

Nature can distroy the brilant technology of the nucs. If a nuc is out of controle, its a big problem. it doesn´t matter if it´s caused by an earthquake or a flood.

Nucs in US were not built on save grounds like in Japan.

Nucs are never completly save! They are a potential hazard for humanity + natur.

But since nobody knows how to store the waste, we don´t need to discuss this isue any further but just to switch of all of them.

[sacraficialangel7]

@Pralinenliebe actually we do know how to store the waste - put it in a perfectly sealed lead box and stick it in the ground

[Pralinenliebe]

@sacraficialangel7

You are so brainy! Why are you not going to all the goverments of this world and tell them?

Wait, I know why! Because your idea is stupid!

Nuclear waste is very hot! A box of lead CANNOT withstand the heat for long time!!!!

And 1 box is not enough! A lot of boxes would be requiered! In a place that could restand the heat for a long time! A place where water, salt, earthquakes, etc. could not destroy your box for 1 mio Years.

But on the other hand, yeah, it´s not a problem!

[sacraficialangel7]

@Pralinenliebe dude, I never pretened to be brainy. that is the way they stor nuclear waste. they build lead boxes and put the waste in them. they then bury the boxes and monitor the area.

[Pralinenliebe]

@sacraficialangel7

All other European countries pay Russia to take their nuc waste which just put it onto an open field in Tomsk.

And USA puts it into the desert in big tanks waiting there for a solution or leaves it in the nucs in pools.

But to leave it in pools in what most countries do. It´s waiting there for a solution. And since there is no solution for it it´s going to wait there for ever.

[Pralinenliebe]

@sacraficialangel7

I never heard of this methode. So were do you have your knowledge from?

Actually there is NO PERMANTENT storage for highly radioactiv nuclear waste. NOWHERE on the whole planet.

Germany tried it once and failed.

Sweden tries to built one but they are still doing reseaches. And they do not use any kind of lead but an alloy.

[alexhn555]

@Pralinenliebe You cant run everytime you are scared, otherwise you'll run all your life. You have to stand for what is good and fight to make things right.

Some plants are safer then others, but I strongly disagree, generalisation is not an option. This is only 1 plant, some are build in far better zones.

[Pralinenliebe]

@alexhn555

By saying that nucs are not save I do not run away!

If I would not get informed about nucs, I ran away cause I tried to ignore the problem and its effect on my life as many people do.

But I know a lot about nucs. I studied Physics and try to keep my knowledge up to date!

This is not running away from a problem but just facing reality! NUCS ARE NOT SAVE! THERE IS NO PERMANENT STORAGE FOR NUC WASTE ON THE WHOLE PLANET!

This are fact! Open your eyes and face it!

[alexhn555]

@Pralinenliebe Question aside: Do you trust the united nations reports on chernobyl, i.e. WHO(4000 deaths), UNSCEAR(9000) and theses others 2 TORCH [The other report on chernobyl] (30000) and IACR [International agency for cancer research] (16000)?

[Pralinenliebe]

@alexhn555

If I should make a guess, I thought Prof. Dr. Lengfelder has a good point. He said no one could say how many people died. The effects on the residentials are quiet many, f.e. cancer, lever or heart problems, etc.

He´s an expert on Radiation Biology. He was in Russia after the accident for years.

But I try to built my judgment on good grounds, don´t like trusting nor guessing. So I don´t know what´s right!

Besides Chernobyl caused a lot of suffering. One can´t put that in figures.

[alexhn555]

@Pralinenliebe I agree too. I'm quite surprised, but yeah, we didn't saw an ounce of proof out of that.

What I miss the most is a balanced argument, such polarisation is not helping. A lot more could be done with a little concertation.

[gamble180]

@alexhn555 Those reports did NOT say 4,000 deaths, 9,000 deaths etc from Chernobyl. They said 56 DEATHS, with POSSIBLY 4,000 more in the future. Those are only speculations. Considering that people said millions would die a few years ago and only 56 actually did, I would say those numbers are exagerated.

[alexhn555]

@gamble180 Yeah, I know, but I just wanted to keep things simple. Obviously when you say "Only 50 people have died so far." You can expect questions and stuff. Having to explain thats because cancer are delayed and bla bla bla, that's way too long.

That's why I say "4000 deaths from the accident". I don't say "as of now" and neither "in the future".

Obviously, these deaths are coming from failed cancers treatments, improve this and you'll reduce the fatalities from the accident.

[nnndddnnnddd]

@Pralinenliebe

"Nucs in US were not built on save grounds like in Japan."

but were not many reactors in Japan built by the US? -with total disregard (no surprise considering america's lack of reasonable standards of course) for nation's seismic vulnerability?

if the US had some decency we'd put the well being of humans before profit, but that is not how it is and never will be at this rate. so bad shit like this will have to escalate until safe nuclear tech plants are actually built. which w