Who's Online

We have 218 guests online


4176 readings
Dr. Strange Whore PDF Print E-mail
Justice News
Sunday, 05 November 2006 12:39

Dr. Strange Whore

How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Nuclear Power

Captain Paul Watson Dr. Patrick Moore along with former Environmental Protection Agency administrator Christine Todd Whitman are both co-chairs of the Clean and Safe Energy Coalition, which supports increased use of nuclear energy. This is a nuclear industry financed lobbying group set up to promote nuclear power.



                                 Dr. Strange Whore at Work

Dr. Strange Whore

How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Nuclear Power

 By Captain Paul Watson

Dr. Patrick Moore along with former Environmental Protection Agency administrator Christine Todd Whitman are both co-chairs of the Clean and Safe Energy Coalition, which supports increased use of nuclear energy.

This is a nuclear industry financed lobbying group set up to promote nuclear power.

No surprise that Whitman is a co-chair but Moore is the former President of Greenpeace Canada and a co-founder along with myself of the Greenpeace Foundation.

Below is an article written by Dr. Patrick Moore for the Greenpeace Report in 1976. Moore was being paid by Greenpeace then and therefore he wrote what Greenpeacers wanted to hear. Today he writes and speaks the words that the nuclear industry wants to hear.

There is no doubt he is a sell-out and a corporate whore. The father of the Greenpeace movement the late Robert Hunter called Moore the ?Eco-Judas.?

Since leaving Greenpeace he has worked for the logging industry, the salmon-farming industry, and the chemical industry even going so far as to lobby for the return of DDT as a pesticide. He also insists that jury is still out on this global warming thing.

He describes himself as a scientist yet he has not published any peer-reviewed papers. He is in fact a public relations flak, cashing in his Greenpeace credentials for big money. He has made himself quite wealthy by betraying his former causes and colleagues.

It is interesting to see the words that Moore wrote about nuclear power when he was being paid to speak out against nuclear power.

It just goes to prove that anything can be justified if the price is right.

 Assault On Future Generations

By Dr. Patrick Moore

 Nuclear power plants are, next to nuclear warheads themselves, the most dangerous devices that man has ever created. Their construction and proliferation is the most irresponsible, in fact the most criminal, act every to have taken place on the planet.

 These are harsh judgments. This article is an attempt to substantiate them and to bring to the public a true understanding of the nuclear power issue.

 Nuclear powerplants are, to put it simply, slow atomic bombs. Both are the result of the same process, the splitting of atoms, which is commonly called nuclear fission. In an atomic bomb the energy derived from nuclear fission is released almost instantaneously. In a nuclear reactor the release of this energy is slowed down and used to produce steam which runs steam turbines which in turn power electrical generators.

Uranium, the fuel that is used for nearly all the presently operating nuclear reactors, occurs in nature as a combination of two distinct isotopes, uranium-235 and uranium-238. For every atom of uranium-235 in a given sample of natural uranium there are over 100 atoms of uranium-238. It is the rarer of these, uranium-235, that is required for nuclear fission.  

 When the atoms of uranium-235 are spilt apart in an atomic bomb or a nuclear reactor the resulting bits and pieces are called fission products or nuclear waste. Among these are the well known strontium-90, cesium-137 and iodine-137 and iodine-131, all of which have been proven to cause cancer. A single large nuclear reactor produces as much nuclear waste in one year as would result from the explosion of 100 Hiroshima-sized atomic bombs. This is why the few nuclear reactors now in operation have already resulted in millions of gallons of highly radioactive wastes which are buried in various locations around the world.

 Due to the slow rate of decay of many of these poisonous nuclear wastes it is necessary that they be kept isolated from the environment for many thousands of years. The rate of radioactive decay of these nuclear wastes cannot be speeded up by any known means. Thus we are confronted with the problem of trying to construct gigantic storage tanks that must not leak for thousands of years. This is the only part of the problem that will be inherited by hundreds of generations to come as a result of nuclear technology.

The promoters of nuclear energy are always reluctant to address themselves to the problem of nuclear waste and its implications for future generations. Instead, they concentrate on the less difficult and more manageable problems of thermal pollution (waste heat) and the possibility of an atomic explosion in a nuclear reactor. This is only a clever way of avoiding the real issues. It should be remembered that there are employed in the nuclear industry some very high-powered public relations organizations. One can no more trust them to tell the truth about nuclear power than about which brand of toothpaste will result in the sexiest smile.

 It would be bad enough if poisonous nuclear wastes were the only long-term problem to result from nuclear power generation. This fact alone is enough to call for a total moratorium on reactor construction until such time as a solution is found to this apparently insoluble problem.

 But a far more serious result of nuclear fission is the production of a substance known as plutonium. This element is created in atomic bombs and in nuclear reactors as a result of the fission reaction?s effect on uranium-238. Plutonium, aptly named after the Green god of Hell, is an inevitable by-product of nuclear power plant operation. It is the most dangerous material on the face of the earth. A list of some of plutonium?s properties will illustrate this fact:

 1)      Plutonium has a half-life of 25,000 years ? this means that it takes 250,000 years for the total decay of this radioactive element.

 2)      Plutonium is the most toxic chemical known to man. A piece of this element the size of a grapefruit is enough to poison every person on earth.

 3)      Plutonium is highly radioactive and the ingestion of even the most minute particle can cause cancer.

 4)      Plutonium can be used as a fuel for nuclear power plants. Plans for future powerplants call for the production of many hundreds of tons of plutonium to be used in ?fast breeder reactors?. It is inevitable that some of this material will find its way into the environment and thus into our air, water and food. Even a small amount could result in an increase in the incidence of cancer.

 5)      Plutonium can be used to make atomic bombs. Virtually all the atomic bombs in the world?s nuclear arsenals are made from this substance. All the plutonium in these bombs has been produced by nuclear reactors.

 It is this last point which must be dealt with at length in order to appreciate to truly insidious nature of the nuclear power industry.

 Plutonium does not occur naturally on the surface of the earth. It was therefore  non-existent until nuclear fission was discovered. As a result of nuclear reactor operations there are now hundreds of this element on the earth, some of it posed atop nuclear missiles, the rest of it stored away in various locations throughout the industrialized world.

 It is far easier to construct a nuclear weapon from plutonium than from uranium-235. In order to build a uranium bomb it is necessary to separate the uranium-235 from the more abundant uranium-238. This is a very difficult and costly operation and requires a great deal of technology and expertise. At this time only a few countries have constructed the facilities necessary for this separation.

 The construction of a plutonium bomb, however, is very simple in comparison. The key ingredient for the production of such a weapon is the waste from a nuclear power plant. It is not difficult to separate the plutonium from the rest of the elements present in nuclear waste. Once this separation is made and plutonium is collected it is then possible, for a few thousands of dollars, to construct a workable nuclear bomb. The true connection between nuclear powerplants and nuclear weapons becomes clearer.

Dr. Edward Teller, one of the fathers of the hydrogen bomb, has estimated that there are over 100,000 people today who have enough knowledge to build an atomic bomb. Yet this same man, in an article printed in the Vancouver Sun of August 16, 1975, Page 6, has come out strongly in favour of a massive increase in nuclear power as the only solution to our ?energy crisis?. In this article he does not once mention the problem of nuclear waste disposal or the more serious problem of Plutonium production. Instead he only assures us that the reactors themselves will not blow up and therefore there is no cause for concern. Dr. Teller has been working with nuclear technology for over forty years. He is well aware of the serious problems I have so far outlined in this article. One can only hope that this argument represents a last desperate thrust by an industry whose own scientists are fast becoming aware of the monster they have created.

 The Canadian nuclear industry has consistently stated to the public that our heavy-water reactor, (CANDU), is safer and more efficient than the United States? light water reactor.

 In truth the CANDU reactor produces three times as much plutonium in its waste than does the comparable U.S. reactor. This is because the fuel used in the CANDU reactor does not have to be enriched to the same degree, i.e. there is a higher percentage of plutonium-producing uranium-238 in the Canadian reactor fuel.

Last year India became the sixth nation in the world to explode a nuclear bomb. Canada was directly responsible for supplying the plutonium for the production of this weapon. It was a Canadian nuclear reactor, sold to India, which produced the necessary plutonium. It was simply left for the Indian scientists to extract the plutonium from the reactors? waste.

 Prime Minister Trudeau has stated that it is Canada?s ?moral responsibility? to supply the technology for nuclear power generation to the under-developed nations of the world. Does he not realize that this is the same thing as saying it is Canada?s ?moral responsibility? to supply nuclear weapons to the whole world? The two acts are at this time inseparable.

  Canada is not in the process of selling nuclear reactors to South Korea and Argentina, both of which are run by extremist military dictatrorships. This is nothing short of a serious international crime on the part of the Canadian government and the Canadian nuclear industry.

 Nuclear powerplants must soon go the way of the SST?s, DDT, and (hopefully soon) whaling fleets if we are to maintain an environment that is suitable for human habitation. The stock-piles of nuclear waste and plutonium are growing daily. The time to stop this crime against ourselves and countless future generations is now.         

 What Patrick Moore says today:

 ?When I helped found Greenpeace in the 1970s, my colleagues and I were firmly opposed to nuclear energy. But times have changed.? 

(What has changed is the source of his income.)

 ?Nuclear power plants are a practical option for producing clean, cost-effective, reliable and safe baseload power.?

(His previous concerns about dangerous hazards have now been replaced by practicality)

?Nuclear energy is safe. In 1979, a partial reactor core meltdown at Three Mile Island frightened the country. At the time, no one noticed Three Mile Island was a success story; the concrete containment structure prevented radiation from escaping into the environment. There was no injury or death among the public or nuclear workers. This was the only serious accident in the history of nuclear energy generation in the United States. Today, 103 nuclear reactors quietly deliver 20 percent of America's electricity.?

(Moore has said many times that no one has been killed in a nuclear plant ever. Leaving aside the indirect links to cancer there is the fact that a small experimental reactor in Idaho was destroyed on January 3, 1961, when a control rod was removed manually.

 The SL-1 accident was the first fatal nuclear accident in the United States.  The men killed in the incident were two Army Specialists, John Byrnes, age 25 and Richard McKinley, age 22, and Richard Legg, a 25 year old Navy Electricians Mate)

 And there was Chernobyl.

?Spent nuclear fuel is not waste.?

(In 1976, Moore was concerned with waste now he says it can be recycled for other uses ? like weapons.)

?Nuclear power plants are not vulnerable to terrorist attack. The five-feet-thick reinforced concrete containment vessel protects contents from the outside as well as the inside. Even if a jumbo jet did crash into a reactor and breach the containment, the reactor would not explode.?

(The so-called experts said that a super tanker accident would never happen with tankers transporting oil from Alaska. They said that there was no danger of terrorists slamming jets into skyscrapers and they said that accidents like Chernobyl would never happen. Never say never Patrick.)

?Nuclear weapons are no longer inextricably linked to nuclear power plants.?

(Interesting word ? inextricably. This means that weapons grade materials can be obtained from other sources and not necessarily just from nuclear plants. What Patrick is spinning here is to suggest that the material can?t come from the plants although of course it can.)  

I have know Patrick Moore for over 35 years and one thing he has always been good at is justifying what will be of benefit to him. When he was five pack a day smoker he used to tell me (a person who has never smoked) that I was being ridiculous in suggesting that smoking was bad for human health and he actually listed the positive benefits of smoking. 

This is a man who will say anything in return for a financial reward.

But one thing is very clear and that is that Patrick Moore is not and has never been a credible scientist. Where once he whored for Greenpeace, saying what they wanted him to say, he now whores for corporations who pay him to say the things they now want him to say.

Or Maybe Dr. Strange Whore has indeed learned to stop worrying about the environment and now loves only one thing ? money.

From Greenpeace to thirty pieces of green.

History will portray him for what he is.   

Last Updated on Sunday, 05 November 2006 12:39

Latest News