"Greenpeace said Tuesday in a new report that more than 90,000 people were likely to die of cancers caused by radiation from the Chernobyl nuclear disaster, countering a United Nations report that predicted the death toll would be around 4,000.
The differing conclusions underline the contentious uncertainty that remains about the health effects of the world's worst nuclear accident as its 20th anniversary approaches."
The Washington Post Going Nuclear
"In the early 1970s when I helped found Greenpeace, I believed that nuclear energy was synonymous with nuclear holocaust, as did most of my compatriots. That's the conviction that inspired Greenpeace's first voyage up the spectacular rocky northwest coast to protest the testing of U.S. hydrogen bombs in Alaska's Aleutian Islands. Thirty years on, my views have changed, and the rest of the environmental movement needs to update its views, too, because nuclear energy may just be the energy source that can save our planet from another possible disaster: catastrophic climate change."
Although Three Mile Island was a success story, the accident at Chernobyl, 20 years ago this month, was not. But Chernobyl was an accident waiting to happen. This early model of Soviet reactor had no containment vessel, was an inherently bad design and its operators literally blew it up. The multi-agency U.N. Chernobyl Forum reported last year that 56 deaths could be directly attributed to the accident, most of those from radiation or burns suffered while fighting the fire. Tragic as those deaths were, they pale in comparison to the more than 5,000 coal-mining deaths that occur worldwide every year. No one has died of a radiation-related accident in the history of the U.S. civilian nuclear reactor program."
“"You're not a designer, you're not a writer, and you're not an editor!"
Well, no, blogger, you're not. And therein lies your gift. Because even if it's true the vast majority of blogs would not be missed by more than a handful of people were the earth to open up and swallow them, and even if the best are still no substitute for the sustained attention of literary or journalistic works, it's also true that sustained attention is not what Web logs are about anyway. At their most interesting they embody something that exceeds attention, and transforms it: They are constructed from and pay implicit tribute to a peculiarly contemporary sort of wonder.
...[T]he Web log reflects our own attempts to assimilate the glut of immaterial data loosed upon us by the "discovery" of the networked world. And there are surely lessons for us in the parallel. For just as the cabinet of wonders took centuries to evolve into the more orderly, logically crystalline museum, so it may be a while before the chaos of the Web submits to any very tidy scheme of organization.”
Feed [03.21.00]
wired
/
slashdot
/
tomalak
/
techdirt
/
bblog
/
webvoice
/
news.com
/
premium blend
/
techblog
/
the register
/
nyt technology
/
salon technology
/
ananova
/
msnbc
/
cs monitor
/
economist technology
/
silicon prairie
/
siliconvalley.com
/
corante
/
mediachannel
/
ojr
/
editor and publisher
/
hbs
/
marketing profs
/
business 2.0
/
red herring
/
fast company
/
darwin
/
a & l daily
/
nyt magazine
/
economist
/
reason
/
edge
/
ny review of books
/
look snazzy and support the site at the same time by buying some snowdeal schwag!
valid xhtml 1.0?
This site designed by
Eric C. Snowdeal III
.
© 2000-2005