jump to navigation

Fukushima readies for dangerous fuel rod removal – Precautionary lesson. November 8, 2013

Posted by @Karen_Fu in environment, environmental pollution, man made calamity, Quick thoughts.
Tags: , , ,
add a comment


I can never fully understand why some people somewhere could still insist on nuclear energy. The link above tells us part of the aftermath of its radioactive contamination in Fukushima. Honestly, the people who insist on nuclear should really go to Fukushima themselves and clean up the contamination instead of talking about why and how else it should be managed to ensure safety for future generations to come. The reality is: unless one knows how to contain nuclear energy risks, no one under our current socio-political-economic situation should ever use nuclear energy as a prime source of energy production. The nuclear fallout should be used as a warning on how justice should be done on any other source of energy used in a similar large scale as a precautionary measure. Any tool given in the wrong hands can be a weapon. And nuclear is by far the worst tool to use. Why tempt it? Just dump it. – Karen Fu

South Korea and Nuclear Safety November 6, 2013

Posted by @Karen_Fu in environment, ethics, human quality, Justice, man made calamity.
Tags: ,
add a comment

When you have people who lack integrity, anything can become a disaster. And when you let such people manage highly combustible nuclear energy, you are courting suicide. The economic attractiveness of using the fuel is often the main lure for using such energy. Ironically, it is that efficiency of using very little to produce that much that fuels potential safety threats both to heath and to the environment. The main issue with all these problems often do not come from the technology itself, but from the people who are behind these technologies. Man can be his own enemy or ally depending on the kind of belief he has. With wisdom intact, nuclear energy should be best scrapped at the current way social politics/ social economics is run. For all you know a nuclear plant run for power energy lines may well be used for nuclear weapons of mass destruction.- Karen Fu

Pilant's Business Ethics Blog

South Korea and Nuclear Safety

South Korea has become the center of a nuclear corruption scandal. Basically, parts that meet the safety requirements of a nuclear plant are expensive. Sub standard parts can save a plant operator millions upon millions of dollars. So, they faked the required documents and used sub standard parts on what appears to be a gigantic scale.

Now, I’m one of those foolish people who keep pointing at the record of problems with nuclear safety. I have the perception regarded by many, even some modern environmentalists as foolish, that nuclear power has been distinguished by lies, exaggerations, safety violations and the occasional complete disaster during all of the history of its use.

Isn’t this a cautionary tale when many reactors in the fourth most powerful economic power in Asia are found to be using parts that in an emergency will fail?

What worries me is the…

View original post 704 more words

(Thorium) Nuclear Reactors / Social Responsibility issue November 5, 2013

Posted by @Karen_Fu in change, environment, ethics, human quality.
Tags: , ,
1 comment so far

The title should read : (Thorium) Nuclear Reactors-Social Responsibility Issue

Sharing a comment post on the topic here. Long time no post on my blog so here’s one to start off : ‘Just fallen ill from too much obligations and am off for now to play Devils’ advocate after Bethan… Hopefully in a fun way with twice the plastic toy horns post Halloween… But this really reminds me of a heated debate on the phd forum a few years back. So, what makes a change in lifestyle to conserve energy so wrong without a slightest explanation? And what makes using nuclear so right when its half life decomposition is so long? Compare its impact with other renewable sources like sun and even water, and consider the pending danger of nuclear war ; these are serious implications to be precautioned. Why promote exuberant waste by adopting say a disposable lifestyle when we could promote improvisation? I am not a materials engineer but in simple logic, any matter that takes a long time to fully decomposed is a danger to human health. Any idea that promotes unlimited wants with no end perishes our dying natural resources. Even if we chose Prof Nocera’s idea of generating unlimited energy using just a swimming pool size of water (personalized energy) , with greed in hand you’ll never know how a negatively creative and selfish mind could come up with. Some traditional ideas of thrift, industriousness, honesty and modesty are dying in an era of pure lust for extravagant and almost heartless lifestyle. Everyone likes to live well. That includes me, who wants a cute gigantic house with plenty creative inventions and ecuational play. But we need to control and watch our wants before our wants kill us. Hope this is taken in good candour….perhaps only the far poorer countries should use nuclear energy because they really need it. then again, who says a non radioactive source may not offer a far livable and healthier solution? In any case, nuclear seems to pose a lot of threat at the moment. Life can be engaging, fun, knowledgeable and with plenty of peace. That includes the way of life for the same set of things. If one could obtain the same or even better quality of living by adopting a seemly less high tech source after weighing out the pros and cons, then one should take the option. Our lives aren’t that long to make wrong decisions. Happy Tuesday! ‘

ADDITION | thoughts on why nuclear energy should be avoided–

As much as learning more about thorium as an added knowledge under nuclear energy is appreciated, I believe that Fukushima and Chernobyl mishaps are real. Personally I am strongly against it. Our local government had wanted the nuclear energy to power our lines. Thankfully it is thrown off after the Fukushima incident. I wouldn’t think a bigger country should play the risk though it is in much better position to do so. Then again, thats me being careful. As responsible policy makers, the people’s physical well being is most important.
Perhaps this link from Physicians for social responsibilty which won a Nobel Peace Prize (PSR.org) would offer a more convincing overview of a nuclear fallout: the costs and consequences of the Fukushima daiichi disaster:

jon Lovett

Now that the first trial of the ‘When Worlds Collide’ MOOC is complete, I’ll try and keep this blog up dated with thoughts and information. I’ll also be going back through the many thousands of discussion comments in the MOOC, and I plan to compile an ebook we can use for the ‘alpha’ launch of the course in March.

I’ll use the blog to post parts of the ebook for comment and reflection. I’ll also be using the blog as an aide memoir and will be posting links to research articles, unless you are in a University it’s likely that you won’t be able to access the full texts of the articles, but you should be able to see the abstracts.

Civil nuclear power is clearly an area where science could potentially be of great benefit to society, particularly with an energy crisis and global climate chaos looming.  In the…

View original post 128 more words