Hi Cite HR friends,
Here is a thought provoking article with a link which gives the REAL side of a Nuclear disaster. Isn't it absolutely relevant to be quoted at this time when the whole media and lots of people are going gung ho on the "Nuclear deal"?
No more Chernobyls
Meet Annya. She is a fifteen year old girl from Belarus, but was unfortunate enough to be born in the fall out zone from the Chernobyl nuclear disaster.
Annya was born in 1990 in a village highly contaminated by the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear meltdown. A cancerous brain tumour at the age of four marked the end of Annya's childhood and the beginning of a life of pain and illness. Annya has spent her life in and out of hospital, every 15 minutes of every night; she must be turned in order to prevent further pain and bedsores.
Twenty years after the disaster, Annya, and her parents battle everyday with the cruel and personal legacy of Chernobyl. For Annya and for the thousands of children like her, you need to speak out and say NO more nuclear, NO more Chernobyls. If you don't, who will?
Call on the UN to stop its promotion of a dirty, dangerous industry and focus its resources exclusively on its critical mission of disarmament and world peace.
Checkout this link for the full article <link no longer exists - removed>
Thanks
Bala
From India, Madras
20Here is a thought provoking article with a link which gives the REAL side of a Nuclear disaster. Isn't it absolutely relevant to be quoted at this time when the whole media and lots of people are going gung ho on the "Nuclear deal"?
No more Chernobyls
Meet Annya. She is a fifteen year old girl from Belarus, but was unfortunate enough to be born in the fall out zone from the Chernobyl nuclear disaster.
Annya was born in 1990 in a village highly contaminated by the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear meltdown. A cancerous brain tumour at the age of four marked the end of Annya's childhood and the beginning of a life of pain and illness. Annya has spent her life in and out of hospital, every 15 minutes of every night; she must be turned in order to prevent further pain and bedsores.
Twenty years after the disaster, Annya, and her parents battle everyday with the cruel and personal legacy of Chernobyl. For Annya and for the thousands of children like her, you need to speak out and say NO more nuclear, NO more Chernobyls. If you don't, who will?
Call on the UN to stop its promotion of a dirty, dangerous industry and focus its resources exclusively on its critical mission of disarmament and world peace.
Checkout this link for the full article <link no longer exists - removed>
Thanks
Bala
From India, Madras
i agree but doesnt everything have a negative side? tht doesnt mean u let the negative outweigh the positive comments expected !!! regds sunayna
From India, Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
Hi Sunayna,
Thanks for your comments.
While I do agree with your point that negative thoughts should not outweigh + ve ones, my point is that isn't better that we are present to the - ve side also.
And in this rat race for "energy superiority" are we losing out on other possible (far less dangerous) alternatives for Oil energy? Isn't it better to drive more focus and investment on other means of alternative energy?
Thanks
Bala
From India, Madras
Thanks for your comments.
While I do agree with your point that negative thoughts should not outweigh + ve ones, my point is that isn't better that we are present to the - ve side also.
And in this rat race for "energy superiority" are we losing out on other possible (far less dangerous) alternatives for Oil energy? Isn't it better to drive more focus and investment on other means of alternative energy?
Thanks
Bala
From India, Madras
hi all, Bala just a thought .... the other not so deadly alternatives to Oil might not really be enough for the big population that is presently on the face of this earth. - Pal.
From India, Pune
From India, Pune
arreree..wait wait...im back
hmm..so i was saying tht it has a bright n useful positive side which shdnt outweigh the dull negative side
bala, its not energy superiority...its "equality"
n as a matter of fact..its not even equality..
US is far more advanced in terms of Technology and weapons compared to india
from what ive read and understood in the ET in the past 1 week
also, todays or yesterday's ET says tht there is some condition which doesnt allow the fuel or something to stay in BAARC
which ensures tht it wont be misused
From India, Mumbai
hmm..so i was saying tht it has a bright n useful positive side which shdnt outweigh the dull negative side
bala, its not energy superiority...its "equality"
n as a matter of fact..its not even equality..
US is far more advanced in terms of Technology and weapons compared to india
from what ive read and understood in the ET in the past 1 week
also, todays or yesterday's ET says tht there is some condition which doesnt allow the fuel or something to stay in BAARC
which ensures tht it wont be misused
From India, Mumbai
Hi Sunayna,
My mistake, it is not even energy equality. US & even China are miles ahead of us as far as energy generation is concerned.
I am not referring to weapon programme of non peaceful uses of Nuclear technology.
What happened in Chernobyl (which the articl was discussing) was an accident in a civilian nuclear reactor. This is what is really dangerous. Strict safeaguards have to be implemented to avoid accidents. Our track record on this has so far been more or less blemishless. But is such a risk worth taking when you have alternate sources of energy and why don't we seriously look at solid investment in research for alternative sources of energy?
I have tried to make clear the point.
More discussions welcome.
Thanks
Bala
From India, Madras
My mistake, it is not even energy equality. US & even China are miles ahead of us as far as energy generation is concerned.
I am not referring to weapon programme of non peaceful uses of Nuclear technology.
What happened in Chernobyl (which the articl was discussing) was an accident in a civilian nuclear reactor. This is what is really dangerous. Strict safeaguards have to be implemented to avoid accidents. Our track record on this has so far been more or less blemishless. But is such a risk worth taking when you have alternate sources of energy and why don't we seriously look at solid investment in research for alternative sources of energy?
I have tried to make clear the point.
More discussions welcome.
Thanks
Bala
From India, Madras
:D Exactly the reason y the civil and military use is gonna be differentiated. (as per paper knowledge again)
From India, Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
Sorry, Sunayna, that is not the reason for splitting civilian and military facilities.
Again I wish to repeat the same thing. What happened in Chernobyl (or for that matter three mile island several years ago) was an accident - and not a deliberate misuse. We are talking here of nuclear accidents - be it in a civilian site or military site. Both ways an accident in a nuclear installation is fraught with dangerous consequences.
Thanks
Bala
From India, Madras
Again I wish to repeat the same thing. What happened in Chernobyl (or for that matter three mile island several years ago) was an accident - and not a deliberate misuse. We are talking here of nuclear accidents - be it in a civilian site or military site. Both ways an accident in a nuclear installation is fraught with dangerous consequences.
Thanks
Bala
From India, Madras
Hi all,
Read this, should we be going this way?????
Quote::::::::::
Scene 1
Customers at a supermarket petrol forecourt in Norwich will soon become the first in the UK to have the option of filling up on E85 bioethanol, the environmentally benign fuel derived from crops. Other local stations are set to follow, making the Norfolk city, for now at least, the biofuel motoring capital of Britain.
To take advantage of this, of course, you will need to drive one of the handful of cars able to run on E85 from the likes of Saab or Ford. There are, as far as we know, no figures available for the number of biofuel-ready motorists in the Norwich area, but it is a fair bet that queues at the pumps in question will hardly stretch around the block.
That isn't, however, a reason for not opening a pump. The car manufacturers at one end of the chain, and the fledgling 'green fuels' industry at the other, are beginning the tricky process of creating a demand and a supply respectively.
What's the point of having a biofuel-ready car if there's no biofuel to put in it? Norfolk is the pump-primer because it has regional agricultural capacity growing the stuff needed to make biofuel, and processing facilities to produce it. From little acorns etc.
Scene 2
BMW announced further plans to push on with series production of hydrogen vehicles. The German auto giant will have a hydrogen-powered 7-series executive model ready within two years, it said this week, and underlined its commitment to hydrogen across its range over the longer term.
It's possible that Norwich will see hydrogen pumps soon, making it the green car capital of Europe, but the point is the same. Without an infrastructure, these alternatives to petrol and diesel have no hope of flourishing.
The automotive OEMs, the energy majors and the fuel retailers can all play their part, but the critical role will, as so often, be down to the government.
Around the world the lesson is the same. If governments are serious about creating demand for alternative energy and power technologies, they need to put their money, in the form of tax breaks, subsidies and other incentives, where their mouth is.
Unquote::::::::::::
Very true! is my opinon.
Thanks
Bala
From India, Madras
Read this, should we be going this way?????
Quote::::::::::
Scene 1
Customers at a supermarket petrol forecourt in Norwich will soon become the first in the UK to have the option of filling up on E85 bioethanol, the environmentally benign fuel derived from crops. Other local stations are set to follow, making the Norfolk city, for now at least, the biofuel motoring capital of Britain.
To take advantage of this, of course, you will need to drive one of the handful of cars able to run on E85 from the likes of Saab or Ford. There are, as far as we know, no figures available for the number of biofuel-ready motorists in the Norwich area, but it is a fair bet that queues at the pumps in question will hardly stretch around the block.
That isn't, however, a reason for not opening a pump. The car manufacturers at one end of the chain, and the fledgling 'green fuels' industry at the other, are beginning the tricky process of creating a demand and a supply respectively.
What's the point of having a biofuel-ready car if there's no biofuel to put in it? Norfolk is the pump-primer because it has regional agricultural capacity growing the stuff needed to make biofuel, and processing facilities to produce it. From little acorns etc.
Scene 2
BMW announced further plans to push on with series production of hydrogen vehicles. The German auto giant will have a hydrogen-powered 7-series executive model ready within two years, it said this week, and underlined its commitment to hydrogen across its range over the longer term.
It's possible that Norwich will see hydrogen pumps soon, making it the green car capital of Europe, but the point is the same. Without an infrastructure, these alternatives to petrol and diesel have no hope of flourishing.
The automotive OEMs, the energy majors and the fuel retailers can all play their part, but the critical role will, as so often, be down to the government.
Around the world the lesson is the same. If governments are serious about creating demand for alternative energy and power technologies, they need to put their money, in the form of tax breaks, subsidies and other incentives, where their mouth is.
Unquote::::::::::::
Very true! is my opinon.
Thanks
Bala
From India, Madras
Community Support and Knowledge-base on business, career and organisational prospects and issues - Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query, download formats and be part of a fostered community of professionals.
Cite hr.zip
Cite HT HR Group.xls