Recently, there has been a lot of controversy about so-called energy drinks.   These are caffeinated drinks sold as energy boosters.  They may be carbonated or uncarbonated and can be found at just about any convenience store or gas station.   Many come in large-sized cans, but an increasing number are of the “shot” variety, coming in a single small bottle or can that can be downed in just about one gulp.

VIA CBS NEWS:

San Francisco sues Monster for marketing energy drink to kids
A fight between Monster Beverage and San Francisco’s city attorney is intensifying. The city attorney is filing a lawsuit against Monster Beverage Corp, the maker of Monster Energy Drinks, accusing the company of marketing to young children.

City Attorney Dennis Herrera said Monday that Monster markets it highly caffeinated drinks to children as young as 6 years old, despite scientific findings that such products can cause health problems including severe cardiac events.

The lawsuit comes after Monster last week sued Herrera over his demands that it reduce the caffeine levels in its drinks and stop marketing to minors.

On Monday, Herrera noted that his office had been working with Monster in “good faith to negotiate voluntary changes” when the company abruptly filed its lawsuit.

…
New York’s attorney general has subpoenaed energy drink makers including Monster about how the drinks are made and marketed, and Democratic Senators Richard Durbin of Illinois and Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut have repeatedly called on the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to look into the safety of the drinks.

Monster has been in the spotlight since October 2012, when the parents of 14-year-old Anais Fournier of Hagerstown, Md. sued the company after their daughter went into cardiac arrest after drinking two of popular energy drinks in 24 hours.

The FDA said in Oct. 2012 it was investigating five deaths and one heart attack linked to Monster Energy Drinks dating back to 2004. One can contains about 240 milligrams of caffeine.

The company denied its drink’s role in the girl’s death in March, with company lawyer Daniel Callahan telling the Associated Press at the time that physicians hired to review the girl’s case determined she died from natural causes, brought on by pre-existing heart conditions.

Oh great, my own Senator, Dick Blumenthal is now getting himself involved. In fact, Blumenthal does not just think that the drinks should not be marketed directly to minors, he actually has suggested that an ID be required to buy them, making them only available to those over 18. Presumably meaning they be kept behind the counter and being subject to carding like cigarettes and alcohol. (Sorry, I do not have a citation for that, as I heard this when he was speaking on a radio interview.)

There are a couple of problems with this:

1. Energy drinks, for all the hype are really nothing more than caffeinated beverages.   What makes an “energy drink” different than something like Coca-Cola or Pepsi is arbitrary.  Many have more caffeine than common sodas, but some don’t.  In general, all have much less caffeine than coffee, which, could legitimately be marketed as an energy drink, but usually is not.
2. There is no evidence that would indicate that there is anything especially dangerous about energy drinks.  It’s true that they are not very nutritious as far as foodstuffs go.  They’re loaded with sugar and their claims of having beneficial vitamins and enzymes are, at best dubious, but that does not make them any worse than any other soft drink.
3. The amount of caffeine in energy drinks is not so high as to preclude one from getting an equal or greater dose of the stuff from other means.  In other words, if you are going to go after energy drinks, you had best be ready to go after a large portion of soft drinks out there.

The example of Anais Fournier is certainly unfortunate, but there’s no reason to think that two Monster Energy Drink.   Based on the reports, she apparently drank two of the drinks over the period of 24 hours.   That means she had about 320 milligrams of caffeine during that period of time.

There is a great deal of hype over energy drinks, what they do and what active ingredients they may contain.   The truth is that, for all their claims of providing lasting energy from enzymes, vitamins, minerals, or some other special compound, they all work in exactly the same way that “energy drinks” have been working for centuries.

Although caffeine, the active ingredient in energy drinks was not isolated until 1820, the stimulating effects of caffeine-containing plant material, such as coffee beans, tea leaves and kola nuts had been known since antiquity.

Brewed coffee, which became popular across the Middle East and Europe in the 1600’s, remains one the largest sources of caffeine.  And, overall, brewed coffee is at least as potent a caffeine source as most energy drinks.

(more…)

This may be old news (about a month) but it is still worth posting.   A poll was recently conducted by Public Policy Polling of Americans on the topic of conspiracy theories.   The number really do not surprise me very much.  If anything, it shows a few conspiracy theories are LESS popular than I might have expected.   Then again, the numbers are still soberingly high.

Via the Atlantic Wire:

Conspiracy	Percent believing	Number of Americans believing
JFK was killed by conspiracy	51 percent	160,096,160
Bush intentionally misled on Iraq WMDs	44 percent	138,122,178
Global warming is a hoax	37 percent	116,148,195
Aliens exist	29 percent	91,035,072
New World Order	28 percent	87,895,931
Hussein was involved in 9/11	28 percent	87,895,931
A UFO crashed at Roswell	21 percent	65,921,948
Vaccines are linked to autism	20 percent	62,782,808
The government controls minds with TV	15 percent	47,087,106
Medical industry invents diseases	15 percent	47,087,106
CIA developed crack	14 percent	43,947,966
Bigfoot exists	14 percent	43,947,966
Obama is the Antichrist	13 percent	40,808,825
The government allowed 9/11	11 percent	34,530,544
Fluoride is dangerous	9 percent	28,252,264
The moon landing was faked	7 percent	21,973,983
Bin Laden is alive	6 percent	18,834,842
Airplane contrails are sinister chemicals	5 percent	15,695,702
McCartney died in 1966	5 percent	15,695,702
Lizard people control politics	4 percent	12,556,562

The margin of error of the poll is 2.8 percent. As with any poll, it’s important to remember that the margin of error may not reflect the true accuracy of the poll, as it can depend on factors like how careful the pollsters were in selecting an appropriate demographic cross-section of the US.  It’s very easy to get skewed results with polling, because telephone surveys tend to get more responses from certain demographics, such as retirees, the unemployed and others who are more likely to be home and willing to answer questions.   Still, the numbers certainly seem plausible and are in line with other polls that have been conducted.

Of course, one also wonders how many people might say yes to certain conspiracy theories while only harboring a slightly sarcastic belief in them.   As with any such numbers, it’s hard to be sure who is a hard-core believer and who has only a passing belief.   One can certainly hope that they might be lower.

You can read more about the poll here. According to Public Policy Polling, the total respondents were 1,247 all of whom were registered voters.   That’s a reasonably good size sample.  The questions were also direct and avoided bias.   The figures also show the breakdown between Republican and Democratic-registered voters.  As one might expect, Republicans tend to be more prone to believing things like Bin Laden is alive, while Democrats are far more likely to think Bush lied about WMD’s.

It’s not surprising that the Kennedy Assassination ranks at the top of the poll.  If anything, it’s surprising it is not higher.   The Kennedy Assassination has always fascinated me, because, despite being a relatively straight-forward shooting, it spawned the single most widespread and enduring conspiracy theory in the US.   There are many reasons for this, including the efforts of those like Oliver Stone and the fact that the events were shocking and the guilt of Lee Harvey Oswald seemed so anti-climactic for such an event.

The Kennedy Assassination is unique in that the conspiracy theories have transcended the normal conspiracy theory subculture and become entirely mainstream.  A large number of Americans did not accept the Warren Commission report as soon as it was published in 1964.  That number continued to climb after a second investigation by the House Select Committee on Assassinations and with the production of numerous books and documentaries supporting conspiracy theories.

The most dangerous of all these conspiracy theories, however, is likely to be the 20% number for autism being connected to vaccines.   This is directly responsible for a number of outbreaks in the US.  Indeed, this belief is hardly just American.  Fear of vaccines has become a major problem across the industrial world.   It goes to show that more effort still needs to be mounted against these harmful myths.

(more…)

As you may be aware, it’s wildfire season, and this year, there is a massive wildfire sweeping across California.  Really, this is not all that unusual.  Almost every year, there is a massive fire in some part of the Western US.   They tend to strike different areas, as once they have struck a part of the country, the vegetation is burned up enough to prevent them from occurring again, in the same place, for several years.

Via USA Today:

Calif. wildfire threatens 4,000 homes as flames spread

LOS ANGELES — A fast-growing wildfire along the Pacific Coast Highway northwest of Los Angeles nearly doubled in size Friday and was threatening more than 4,000 homes as crews battled strong winds, tinder-dry conditions and record-breaking temperatures.

The Springs Fire had burned more than 18,000 acres of rugged, brush-covered terrain by late afternoon and was 20% contained, the state’s fire agency reported. Forecasters said that 45-mph wind gusts would taper off and that cooling may begin by evening.

At midday, the temperature hit a record 96 in Camarillo, where the blaze began, about 50 miles north of Los Angeles.

Thousands of residents had already evacuated the Ventura County fire, including 118 families ordered from a premier Navy base because of heavy smoke after flames jumped the scenic highway Friday morning.

The fire began Thursday during the morning rush hour near U.S. 101, which is the major commuter route into Los Angeles’ San Fernando Valley. After reaching the coast overnight, the fire headed back inland Friday.

The fire had damaged 15 homes and destroyed at least 25 outbuildings and other property by midday. Large animals and livestock were being taken to the county fairgrounds.

In addition to 4,000 homes, the wildfire was threatening 100 businesses in its southwestern race toward Malibu. Officials said Friday afternoon that the famous beach community was not threatened.

When these fires threaten homes and communities, it’s firefighting aircraft that can be used to make a big impact. Aircraft can rapidly lay down large strips of water or fire retardant. For this reason, they have been the mainstay of wildfire fighting for decades.

Unfortunately, the current fleet of firefighting aircraft is nowhere near as capable or as new as one would hope. In fact, it’s a hodge-podge of new and old aircraft, some dating back to the Second World War. A few are very large aircraft, such as C-130’s, and are capable of dropping large loads of water or retardant, but many are vintage 1940’s flying boats and bombers, with only a few thousand pounds of capacity.

Even the highly capable C-130’s are showing their age. In 1994, a C-130 broke apart in mid flight while fighting forest fires. The aircraft had been an ex-military transport and was long past its prime, having experienced more than its recommended flight hours and been subject to some extremely stressful maneuvers. Last year, two 50+ year old Lockheed P2V’s experienced problems while fighting fires, one of them crashing.

When it comes to fighting fires, there are a few things that are clear:  bigger is always better.  A bigger aircraft can deliver more retardant or water than a smaller one.  If it is big enough, it may even be able to put out a large fire in one pass, without having to return for more water, giving the fire time to grow.   It’s also clear that fire fighting aircraft should be designed to fight fires without exceeding their normal flight characteristics.   And, since aerial firefighting is so demanding, newer aircraft with fewer flight hours are always preferable.

Thankfully, someone stepped up to the plate and built one…

This is the Evergreen Supertanker.   A firefighting aircraft engineered and built by Evergreen Aviation.   It’s a Boeing 747-100, but it’s a lot more than just a jumbo jet with big tanks slapped on.   The Supertanker uses a specially engineered system of tanks and pressurized nozzles to allow it to disperse water or retardant while maintaining a flight profile entirely within the normal margins of a 747 during flight and landing.  With a total capacity of 20,500 US gallons, the supertanker dwarfs most other firefighting aircraft.

The aircraft was manufactured in 1971 but is still well within the typical flight hours for a 747 and has undergone a complete structural inspection.   It has been extensively tested and represents an investment of many millions of dollars in design and construction.

The Supertanker has proved itself highly capable, putting out fires in Israel and Spain.  It has the ability to lay down a strip of fire retardant three miles long (5 km) or can drop its load in segments, putting out hot spots without needing to discharge it all at once.   This capability has proven to be extremely valuable in real world fire fighting.

So where is it?   Is it in California fighting the fires?   If not, why isn’t it?

(more…)

Activists have often claimed that the United States Nuclear Regulatory Committee is in the pocket of the nuclear industry.   However, based on the attitude of some of the recent commissioners, that seems to be quite the opposite of the truth, as is especially evident with former chairman Gregory Jaczko.

Jaczko was first appointed as a commissioner in 2005 and was promoted to the head commissioner and chairman of the agency in 2009.   He served until his resignation last year.  Jaczko was controversial for the entirety of his time at the NRC, and especially after becoming chairman.  He was widely accused of withholding information, in an attempt to slow or stop regulatory approval.  For example, in 2011, Jaczko failed to release sufficient information to allow the Yucca Mountain project to be evaluated properly, effectively halting approval from moving forward.   Jaczko was also accused by NRC staffers of frequently losing his temper and verbally assaulting those working under him.

It has always been clear that Jaczko’s opinion of nuclear energy has been generally unfavorable.  Indeed, he was the only commissioner to vote against approval of new plant licenses in the United States in 2012.   He was also generally not well received by the nuclear industry.

Yet the extent of Gregory Jaczko’s anti-nuclear feelings did not become entirely apparent until after his resignation from the NRC, in July 2012.   As a commissioner, Jaczko was not able to provide entirely candid comments on nuclear energy.  Had he spoken out directly against nuclear energy, it would have shown a very obvious conflict of interest with his regulatory position.  Yet, after resigning, Jaczko stated that he believed that ALL US nuclear reactors are so flawed and unsafe that they should be shut down as soon as possible. When asked why he did not state this during his time on the commission, Jaczko stated ” didn’t really come to it until recently.”

Calling for what amounts to a complete phase-out of nuclear energy puts Jaczko on a very extreme end of the spectrum.   It is very disturbing, though not entirely surprising, to learn that NRC had been chaired for three years by someone who is so anti-nuclear that he wants a full nuclear phase-out.   It’s the equivalent of someone who believes that humans are not fit for flight being the head of the Federal Aviation Administration.   Indeed, with such extreme views, they may as well have just made Helen Caldicott or Amory Lovins the NRC chair.

Unfortunately, if you thought we were done with this guy, that is not the case.

In addition to the distinct possibility that his mindset is not entirely uncommon at the NRC, it seems Jaczko has found his way back into a federal position.   He was just appointed to oversee the National Nuclear Security Administration.

Via the Hill:

Reid appoints former NRC chief Jaczko to nuclear panel

Former Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Chairman Gregory Jaczko was appointed Thursday to a new panel charged with monitoring the agency that oversees the nation’s nuclear weapons stockpile.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) tapped Jaczko — a former aide for the Nevada Democrat — for the position with the Congressional Advisory Panel on the Governance of the Nuclear Security Enterprise.

The panel was created by the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act. Its purpose is to make recommendations for improving operations at the Energy Department’s (DOE) nuclear weapons agency.

Those suggestions regarding the DOE’s National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) will be revealed in a report that’s due by February, 2014.

Jaczko has kept a low profile following an unceremonious departure from the NRC in which he resigned his post following allegations that he verbally abused staff.

His appointment to the 12-member panel, as well as a book deal he signed with Simon and Schuster on Wednesday about “Jaczko’s controversial years as the top nuclear regulator in the country,” will change that.

The controversial former NRC chairman’s appointment to the panel will likely rile conservatives.

Well, it has certainly riled me!

(more…)

What can I say.  I am mad.   I am ripping mad.  I’m disgusted.  I’ve seen a level of dishonesty and scientific misinformation so grotesque, I don’t even know what to say.

One expects that vested interests will tweak data or publish biased studies to support their own causes from time to time.  It’s dishonest and unacceptable, but it happens.  Still, sometimes the level of dishonesty is so severe it really shocks the conscious.

Such is the case with a recent “study” from the Radiation and Public Health Project.   It is so dishonest in its claims it really makes me wonder about the pathology of those who are behind it.  What is their goal?  To they, deep down, think they are serving a greater good with these lies?   Have they justified this to themselves through some rationalization that preserves their need for attention and to appear to be heros?   I’m sure a psychologist could have a field day.

Here is how it was reported in Yahoo News:

Fukushima fallout may be causing illness in American babies: Study
A new study from the Radiation and Public Health Project found that babies born in the western United States as well as other Pacific countries shortly after the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan in March 2011 may be at greater risk for congenital hypothyroidism.

Babies born in places including Hawaii, Alaska, California, Oregon and Washington shortly after Fukushima were 28 percent more likely to suffer from the illness, according to the study, than children born in those same regions one year earlier. The illness, if untreated, can cause permanent handicaps in both the body and brain.

According to the U.S. National Library of Medicine, “If untreated, congenital hypothyroidism can lead to intellectual disability and abnormal growth. In the United States and many other countries, all newborns are tested for congenital hypothyroidism. If treatment begins in the first month after birth, infants usually develop normally.”

But… how could this possibly be?

It is true that nuclear fission produces a significant quantity of iodine-131, a radioactive isotope which can cause damage to the thyroid, due to its high biological uptake and tendency to accumulate in the thyroid.   Thyroid tissue is radiation-sensitive to begin with, so in nuclear accidents, iodine-131 is one of the greatest concerns.

Of course, we are talking about the United States of America.  This is thousands of miles from Japan and any iodine-131 that might make it across the Pacific would be expected to be extremely dilute.   Not only that, but with a half-life of only eight days, the fact that it takes a minimum of a few days for atmospheric material to traverse the Pacific (and usually more than that) means that a good portion of the isotope would have decayed by the time it reached the US.

This is born out by the fact that when iodine-131 (which normally does not occur in nature) was detected in the US, after the Fukushima incident, the levels were miniscule.  Radioisotopes like iodine-131 can be detected at extremely low levels. This is done by collecting samples of precipitation, dust or air and placing them in a detector which can detect the characteristic energy levels of the gamma ray photons radioisotopes emit.  When a gamma ray of the energy associated with iodine-131 is detected, it indicates an atom of the isotope has decayed.  Since its half-life is so short, even a few hundred atoms of iodine-131 will produce detectable radiation, if they are present in a sample.

It is a testament to the precision of modern gamma spectrometers that iodine-131 could be detected at all in both the US and Europe.  Yet, although it was detected, in some cases, the levels were so low that the actual concentration could not even be reliably established.    This is not a big surprise, given that even in Tokyo, which was thousands of miles closer to Fukushima, the levels of iodine-131 only briefly exceeded what is considered the “safe” standard for infants.   It should be noted that the standard is extremely conservative.

If that is not compelling reason enough to be skeptical of claims that the iodine-131 levels in the US were high enough to cause harm to infants, it should also be noted that an entire generation of US citizens was exposed to hundreds or thousands of times more iodine-131 from atmospheric nuclear testing.   What harm this may have caused is still a matter of debate.  it likely did result in some additional cases of thyroid cancer, but it certainly did not lead to a large number of kids of the 1950’s and 1960’s with major thyroid problems.

So how could these babies possibly have been damaged by Fukishima fallout?

IT DIDN’T

Lets take a look at the actual study, which can be downloaded here.

(more…)

There have been many claims made about the potential health dangers of genetically modified crops by a number of groups.  Of course, most of these claims lack even the slightest evidence and seem to be based on the fallacy that anything artificial is dangerous.   While a few genetically engineered crops under development did show potential to cause allergies, these were quickly pulled from consideration for use in actual products.

Still, opponents continue to grasp for straws to prove that modifying DNA intentionally (as opposed as to by accident, which happens all the time) is somehow a danger to health.  A recent study claimed to have found strong evidence of harm, yet critical evaluation has found it not only to be flawed, but actually fraudulent.

Via Forbes:

Scientists Smell A Rat In Fraudulent Genetic Engineering Study
Last week French microbiologist Gilles-Eric Séralini and several colleagues released the results of a long-term study in which rats were fed genetically engineered (AKA genetically modified, or “GM”) corn that contains enhanced resistance to insects and/or the herbicide glyphosate. They took the unprecedented step of pre-releasing the paper to selected media outlets under an embargo on the condition that they sign a non-disclosure agreement. (That prevented the journalists from seeking scientific experts’ opinions on the article.) At a carefully orchestrated media event they then announced that their long-term studies found that the rats in experimental groups developed tumors at an alarming rate. Within hours news of their “discovery” echoed around the world. As we say today, the story “went viral.”

This really should have raised a red flag from the beginning. Typically, scientists will publish their work in a journal for review by other scientists before going to the media. If there are leaks about an especially large or important discovery, they may need to engage the media sooner, but this is usually done in a guarded manner. Otherwise, it’s normally improper to talk with the media about scientific data before it has been released in full, and doing so with a non-disclosure agreement is not normal.

Based on this atypical behavior and apparent desire for early media attention, the scent of a rat should have been strong even before the paper was released.  They also preempted publication of their study with the release of these extremely disturbing photos of the rats used in the experiment.

(more…)

For those who do not know, I had previously run for the United States Congress and I fully intend to do so again in the year 2014.   As a proponent of science and energy policy reform, the issue of global warming/climate change and how the US should respond to mitigate it is of special importance.

I have begun work on a detailed policy outline on the topic of greenhouse gas emissions and how to reduce them while maintaining a policy that does not result in draconian cuts on energy usage or resort to the use of carbon taxation.   This is accomplished by targeting sectors that produce the most greenhouse gasses and attempting to facilitate change through the creation of economically-beneficial alternatives.

The current draft is in outline form.  It is not a full report but only a skeleton version of the areas that will need to be addressed.   Still, it is sixteen pages long even as is.

It is very important to remember that this is only a draft.  This does not represent the final policy statement and is subject to change.   It is a first draft of what is expected to be several revisions before a final, detailed report is put together. Some of the items may end up being dropped if they turn out to be too expensive or have too little benefit.  In the first draft, all potential areas are included.  It thus may be viewed, at least in some ways, as a “wish list” of policies that should be considered.

The reason I am publishing this is I am hoping to get some constructive criticism and suggestions from readers.   I recognize that readers of this blog are often very insightful.  Also, I pride my campaign on being as open as possible and listening to others for input.

Full Outline in PDF Form

Again, remember it is not the final revision and is not what I have officially stated as my fixed policy.  It is only a draft under revision.

This may be going a bit off topic for a science blog, but this kind of thing really drives me crazy and it seems to be happening more and more.  Police and other officials are using extremely scary-sounding items discovered to pat themselves on the back for another victory against terrorism.   It could be “chemicals,” “an unidentified white powder,” “radioactive materials” or just about anything else.  The problem has become so bad that now nearly every police report of potential weapons or dangerous goods seized must be scrutinized with extreme skepticism.

In this case it’s rocket launchers showing up at a gun buyback program.  There is much less to this than it seems.

(For those who might not know, a “Gun Buyback” is an event run by local police with the aim of collecting firearms that are no longer in use or may slip into the wrong hands. They may offer money, gift cards or something else to have the guns turned in. The idea is to reduce the number of guns floating around in the population and potentially available for misuse)

Via NBC News:

Rocket launchers surface during Los Angeles guns buyback
When Los Angeles police moved up their annual Citywide Gun Buyback program to this week, they collected an arsenal that included 75 assault weapons, 698 rifles, 363 shotguns, 901 handguns and — more surprisingly — two rocket launchers.

The weapons, essentially long metal tubes once capable of firing rockets, lacked the projectiles and parts needed to fire them, but even so had no place on the streets, police said.

“Those are weapons of war, weapons of death,” said LAPD Chief Charlie Beck, according to the Los Angeles Times. “These are not hunting guns. These are not target guns. … they have no place in our great city.”

Police said the people who brought in the weapons told police that they came from family members who served in the military and no longer wanted rocket launchers in their homes, the Times reported.

LAPD was planning to check with the military to determine the origins of the launchers, police said.

As it turns out, these were not the first launchers to turn up at a gun buyback. Last May, when the event was timed for Mother’s Day, one of these large firearms surfaced in Los Angeles.

I love the way that they say ” they have no place in our great city.” It almost sounds heroic, as if a great evil has been vanquished.

There are two things left out of most of the reports. The first is that it’s completely legal to own these and the second is that if you wanted to kill someone with them, the only way you might be able to do it is by whacking them over the head.

(more…)

This blog is obviously primarily about science, science reporting, skepticism and related topics.  However, being a resident of the southeastern portion of Connecticut, it would be impossible to continue on without mentioning the tragic shooting that occurred at Sandy Hook Elementary school in Newtown.   Connecticut is a small state to begin with, and Newtown, as it happens is only about twenty minutes drive from my home.  I’ve been to and passed through Newtown many times and I know several people who live in the town.

I did not know any of the victims, but in the past few days I have come to discover just how close I am to this tragedy.  The manager of my congressional campaign has worked for the state as a child advocate.   During a divorce and custody dispute, he was appointed to represent the interests of a young girl.  As is often the case, he became well acquainted with her and her family.  She was one of the victims who was killed on Friday.   My former nextdoor neighbors, who are also good friends of my parents, have a granddaughter in kindergarden at the school where the shooting occurred.  As it turns out, she was absent the day it happened, but no doubt the trauma of losing friends will be difficult for her and the family to deal with.  I have other acquaintances who have children who attend the school or who have lost friends or neighbors.  At my place of work, which, amongst other things, sells flowers, a number of orders were placed for sympathy arrangements for the families of the dead.

While there have been other shootings and tragic events, and indeed, human tragedies happen every day, nothing of this scope has hit quite so close to home and affected so many in my life before.

Of course, there is really no way to respond to such an event that will ever do much to change things.  None the less, some of the responses in the wake of the tragic events have been extremely disheartening.

(more…)

For decades, a nuclear fuel fabrication facility has operated on the outskirts of Toronto, Ontario.  Here, in a small industrial area, natural uranium oxide is brought to be compressed into small pellets, which are used for fuel in Canadian nuclear reactors.  The uranium is not enriched, as Canadian nuclear reactors use natural uranium with .7% uranium-235.   The material is identical to what is found in rocks and soil around the world, although it is purified and concentrated.  It’s about as common in the crust of the earth as tin, and, on rare occasions, may be found in a nearly pure oxide form in nature, as the result of geological forces.

No nuclear activities actually go on at the facility and the material does not result in any more radiation than would be found in many rock quarries.  The material is not a radiation hazard and only slightly toxic, considerably less toxic than substances like cadmium or mercury.

The plant also has never been a secret.  Granted, there are no big signs displaying the fact that the product produced on site happens to be uranium, but its operated completely in the open.  Copies of relevant licenses and permits can be obtained from the Canadian government.  Workers at the plant are free to discuss the nature of their employment openly.  If you knocked on the door of the plant and asked whoever came to open it what happens there, they would surely tell you that they make uranium fuel pellets.   There’s absolutely nothing hidden about it.

However, it seems that most in the community were simply unaware that the plant existed or that in this normal looking building uranium was being made into pellets.  They just went about their every day lives presuming that thenondescript building must be doing some non-scary industrial process, like storing large amounts of chlorine gas or hydrofluoric acid.

Until one day someone found out the horrible truth, that had never even been hidden to begin with…
(more…)