So far I am learning much about the production of energy, many would probably agree that if we as a society can use natural resources it will be better for the planet. In the case of nuclear power plants many of my friends disagree on the usefulness of the reduction in greenhouse emissions while others including myself feel that just because the cost of producing electricity generation is cheaper for the usable energy in nuclear power.
what are the risks? These are the questions I ask myself as I study the science of atomic nuclei.
Nuclear technology is a fascinating subject to study in theory but what are the repercussions in trying to save a few dollars if it means putting peoples lives in jeopardy. Semi renewable energy is something I want to see going forward and as I come across more information I will share my thoughts.
Some things to think about include answering the question of the disadvantages to nuclear energy and power generation, does the bad outway the good? only time will tell it just may not happen in our life time and the scary fact is that the advantages of those future generations can not be predicted no matter how much research is currently being done.
Radiation exposure from what I understand causes acute health problems in victims who come in contact with high doses of ionizing radiation. Those nuclear plant workers in Japan who experienced damage to the nuclear power reactors will be first in line for treatment.
Interestingly, from this tragedy there is a gleamer of hope. Infusion of blood stem cells can be introduced into the bodies of the workers at the Fukushima Dai-ichi plant.
Stem cell doctors will have to harvest red and white blood cells from the 400 workers to freeze and later use to provide bone marrow transplantation. The goal is to restore the workers bone marrow production which introduces oxygen to the bloodstream. As seen in cancer patients individuals with high doses of radiation lose stem cells causing the need for replacement.
The question I have in this situation is that the damage radiation causes can effect other areas in the body such as the organs and digestive tissues. So if drugs such as potassium iodine which only helps to protect against thyroid cancer.
Could it just be hopeful thinking that lives can be saved, especially those with acute radiation syndrome?
This is just my observation after reading news spots and doing some research on the whole process, apparently our body will replace old blood cells with new ones and our blood is what carries oxygen as well as platelets to the immune system. My concern is that will there be enough drugs made available for those who need treatment.
Will these advanced medical procedures work for the long-term? To me it seems to be good for the short-term but as for years down the road it is something that needs to be closely looked at in the coming months.
In Berlin protests in front of the RWE, thousands of people rally to have the nuclear reactors taken off the grid. Will Germany end the use of nuclear energy by instead opting for renewable energy after talks of several of the nuclear power plants to transition over the next 25 years by phasing out the use of atomic energy.
My question is how would this effect countries like the United States who have a new power plant in construction as of the start of the year?
France relies on 70 percent of nuclear energy for its power and with Germany changing its course to include alternative energy sources it will lead to higher energy costs for consumers.
Europe's need for continuing with the use of its 143 nuclear reactors shows that even if protestors of the christian democrates continue to demand a anti-nuclear coalition be passed the nuclear crisis in Japan will change the view of chancellor Angela Merkel.
Is this response from Germany rational or are they allowing electoral politics get in the way? Closing seven of the coutries 17 nuclear plants comes at a time where the upcoming state election where the Greens doubled their voters share to win the state governmentship. So it looks as if Greens defeat Merkel’s party in state elections amid Fukushima disaster.
Nuclear scientists and meteorologists say that any radioactive fallout is not dangerous. They even say that the leaking of radioactive water that is spilling into the sea at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, will not harm the fish or marine animals.
What should one believe?
One moment the media is talking all doom and gloom and then the next minute government officials state that the health risks to U.S. citizens is nothing to worry about.
The part that is the hardest to swallow in this scenario is all the people trying to sell potassium iodide tablets which only works for those who have been exposed to radioactive materials and even then it will only help the thyroid.
What about all the other vital organs in the body?
Next I have read people say that one can protect themselves from radiation exposure by eating certain foods.
I am sure there is some basis to this analogy because recent cancer patients who have undergone extensive chemotherapy have seen benefits of eating dark green leafy vegetables, vitamin d and vitamin k as well as eating seaweed.
Ironically sea vegetables and algae can be bought in bulk online with most of it harvested in Aran Islands, North Atlantic, United Kingdom .
If you do a search for sea green products you will find that most of the small sites that sell kelp, agar, spirulina, chlorella, seaweed nori, miso soup etc. are sold out or have a long waiting time for processing due to high demands.
This could lead to the production of seaweed supplements where the pill has a seaweed extract. The seaweed supplements are suppose to detox the body. Since kelp and seaweed are the most protective natural resources against radiation and environmental pollution, particularly heavy metals its worth a try.
Just remember that there are other health risks that need to be addressed during this opinion vs. science debate.