The Pacific Ocean is Dying

[xchrom]

http://www.nationofchange.org/pacific-ocean-dying-1337346516

Just prior to the Supermoon of March 18th, 2011, the world witnessed a natural and manmade disaster of epic proportions. What transpired off the coast of Honshu Island, Japan on March 11 has forever altered the planet and irremediably affected the global environment. Whereas the earthquake and tsunami proved to be truly apocalyptic events for the people of Japan, the ongoing nuclear disaster at Fukushima is proving to be cataclysmic for the entire world.

Most of the world community is still unaware of the extremely profound and far-reaching effects that the Fukushima nuclear disaster has had. If the nations of the world really understood the implications of the actual ‘fallout’ – past, current and future – the current nuclear energy paradigm would be systematically shut down. For those of us who are in the know, it is incumbent upon each of us to disseminate the relevant information/data necessary to forever close down the nuclear power industry around the globe.

There is now general agreement that the state of the art of nuclear power generation is such that it was deeply flawed and fundamentally dangerous from the very beginning. This fact was completely understood to be the case by the industry insiders and original financiers of every nuclear power plant ever built. Nuclear engineers had a very good understanding of just how vulnerable the design, engineering and architecture was at the startup of this industry. Nevertheless, they proceeded with this ill-fated enterprise at the behest of who?

Therefore, this begs the question, “Why would such an inherently unsafe technology and unstable design be implemented worldwide in the first place?”

[pscot]

1. Yeah? So what's the big deal?

I mean it's not like we don't have other oceans.

[GliderGuider]

2. This begs the question...

“Why would any inherently unsafe technology be implemented worldwide in the first place?” Like, for example, the use of fossil fuels, or the moldboard plow, or the spear?

This isn't an idle or purely mischievous question. Humans have a 50,000 year history of developing new technologies to solve perceived problems, only to find that our incredibly powerful ability to adapt through invention generally leaves us with larger and deeper problems down the road. Nuclear power is just one particularly poignant example of this tendency. It's my no means the only one, or even the worst one.

If anyone wants to know how this "vicious circle principle" works, I highly recommend the recent book "Too Smart for our Own Good: The Ecological Predicament of Humankind" by Dr. Craig Dilworth of Uppsala University.

[dixiegrrrrl]

11. Perfect title, indeed.

ironic indeed is the name "homo sapiens".

[lilithsrevenge12]

3. It's amazing how the human race seems to top itself every year for environmental catastrophes.

We thought the oil spills were bad, I'll raise you a floating island of trash. Screw your Texas sized ocean dump site, I'll raise you the complete destruction of nuclear power plant resulting in worldwide radiation. Maybe the next step is we some how manage to make all the oceans miraculously evaporate because we found a way to make our cars run on salt.

I'm excited to see what comes next year!

[lumberjack_jeff]

4. The claim in the subject demands better evidence in the story.

The subject says the pacific is dying, while the article says "nuclear energy is bad".

The latter may be true, but that doesn't mean the former is.

[Overseas]

5. And hey, we can just redefine Dying !!

There will surely be some life forms that survive an ever-warmer more radioactive ocean!

[bahrbearian]

7. Ya, even thought you never have been a "Lumberjack"

You were telling me that Virgin Old Growth spanned all the way from Northern Cal to Southeast Alaska and you knew this because "you" could see it from I-5 when you were driving and Google maps . Now your telling me the Pacific Ocean it OK because of your experience as a Seafarer? What did you drive up Hwy 101 or Google it ,to determine that too.

[lumberjack_jeff]

8. I think you have me confused with... a flawed recollection.

I'm saying that the article provides no proof, or even evidence, for the subject.

You seem to be drawing from an irretreviably corrupted recollection of this thread.

I never suggested that virgin old growth is ubiquitous anywhere on the US pacific coast outside of protected areas, and I wouldn't have needed google maps to tell me this. More to the point, I'm quite lost as to what this might have to do with the subject at hand.

[bahrbearian]

9. Bull Shit and a site search would prove me right.

So do it! You also told me , Tidal energy was only Therory . Yet I supplied you with links and you dissmissed them.

[lumberjack_jeff]

10. So... do so.

Last edited Sun May 20, 2012, 03:32 PM - Edit history (1)

They are your claims. I have nothing to prove.

There is a lot of energy in the tides- the problem is harnessing it cost effectively.

If you can't produce a link to me saying those things, pick one:
a) lying
b) delusional
c) a & b

[CrispyQ]

6. Why would such an inherently unsafe technology and unstable design...

...be implemented worldwide in the first place?"

Profit & greed.

The upshot of each of these articles is that the Pacific Ocean is extremely vulnerable to the radioactive waste being dumped into her waters at Fukushima. Should another catastrophic earthquake occur, it could create a new and more complicated nuclear disaster scenario that is truly irreparable. Even without any seismic activity affecting the nuclear sites, the current state of affairs has taken for granted that the Pacific Ocean will become a nuclear dumping ground for decades to come. It has not been lost on us that such an inevitability appears to be the only practical expedient available.

I think the situation is critical, however I don't have much hope that there will be an international response unless things get drastically worse. Putting together an international team would mean that other countries would also have to admit the dangers of nuclear power & then citizens might possibly demand that their nukes be turned off too.