Alert icon
We're changing our privacy policy. This stuff matters.  Learn more  Dismiss

Wasserman is wrong

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
1,149
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Oct 22, 2007

Rebuttal to Harvey Wasserman's incorrect assertions about nuclear costs, nuclear waste, and nuclear safety.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

License:

Standard YouTube License

Link to this comment:

Share to:

Uploader Comments (atomicrod59)

  • Adams numbers on cost are wrong. I did metalurgy on nuclear reactor parts and in my opinion the risk of another chernobyl type catastrophic failure is too big. We need people who worked in the industry to speak up now. Where are the whistle blowers?

  • Tell me which numbers are wrong.

    What does "I did metalurgy" on nuclear reactor parts mean?

    There is NO risk of a Chernobyl type failure in any reactor with a containment building; they are designed specifically to retain radioactive material from all potential accidents.

    Rod Adams

    Editor, Atomic Insights

    Host, The Atomic Show

    Founder, Adams Atomic Engines, Inc.

Video Responses

This video is a response to NukeFree.org Responds to the Rebuttals
see all

All Comments (24)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • He bases his argument on anecdotal evidence.

    Weak.

  • You have to be an idiot to limit yourself to these three choices.

  • Wasserman is an idiot however you put it. How can one be utter wrong for decades. His stated facts are rather deceptive in presentation. The only non CO2 emitting power source that can reliably generate the base load is nuclear.

  • I do not have all the details on nuclear power plant design. However, as far as waste storage Adam is only talking about the high-intensity radioactive materials, which are relatively compact (but very dangerous). The medium level and low level waste are much more voluminous and also can not be dumped into the environment.

    Adam ending with name calling shows his level of character and thought process. Those with the foresight to protect humanity from nuclear waste should be heeded.

  • If you wikipedia "metallurgy" you will find that it is the science of metals. I majored in metallurgy in college. In one of my jobs, I was the manager of a heat treat department in the steel fabrication industry. As manager I was responsable for all testing and quality control. I also did problem solving and failure analysis. We worked on parts for every kind of machine you could imagine, including nuclear reactors. Thats what I mean when I say "I did metallurgy". "NO risk" can not exist.

  • Great video! I agree totally with your points.

    One thing Wasserman needs to look at is a grid wide basis. Theory is great, but what are countries actually doing? Germany is spending billions on renewables, but they can't rely on it. So they are also building coal power plants. France is willing to rely on nuclear, and they aren't building coal power plants. It's pretty simple.

  • So is the oil industry.

  • Wasserman is an idiot

Loading...

0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more