Studio 360

I always wondered why Three Mile Island is described as the biggest nuclear power disaster in the US. My guess is that it's the only one that any significant attention in the news because the only nuclear power incident in the US to cause casualties was the incident at the National Reactor Testing Station SL-1 reactor (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SL-1). The results were certainly striking to the imagination, although I seem to recall that my father, who went through the Naval Nuclear Power School and spent time training there in Idaho, recounted the incident to me with a much more dramatic and grim slant than wikipedia.

I couldn't figure out from the piece if now we are to forget the danger of radiation from nuclear energy and bombs; that those who were working against nukes in the '80s were just silly and wasting their time or what? I find it curious that a story on nukes failed to mention that the only actual bomb blasts happened when the U.S. annihilated Hiroshima and Nagasaki and left a clear picture of the Day After to study for 50 years. No need to speculate, people die horrible deaths and suffer horrible lives of radiation sickness. The U.S. needs to lead the world in getting rid of the bombs and developing other forms of energy production.

What about nuclear waste? Maybe I haven't been keeping tabs on the issue, but is nuclear waste safe? Have we figured out a safe place to store, recycle, or dispose of it?

Even though your guest was correct on many points I feel you missed the mark on this one. During the 70's and early 80's I lived within view of the Pilgrim Nuclear plant and later on the Seabrook plant, both in highly populated areas. Our protests were not based on the fear of the unknown. At the time there was no realistic plan for waste storage and the government was looking at the White Mountains of New Hampshire as a possible site. I don't think much has changed and Dr. Dupont's casual attitude about the potential risks I find disturbing.

Because I have 150 lightbulbs in my house, we are delivering nuclear waste to your house tomorrow..yes we can

Because I drive a car 1 mile to my office every day, we are delivering nuclear waste to your house tomorrow..yes we can

Because I am too lazy to put on a sweater at night, and have to heat my basement, bathrooms, and other empty rooms I will be delivering nuclear waste to your house tomorrow..yes we can

Because I built a house for my car with a cement floor, a roof that doesnt leak, electricity, water, and sewer (better than the housing of a billion people) we are delivering nuclear waste to your home tomorrow.. Yes we can

Hearing Dr Du Pont's comments brought my hair on end. He relegates our concerns about nuchelar power to a mere mental illness. I find this woefully preposterous and condescending.

I watched "The Day After" he mentioned as "fear inducing". I have a friend who was in the SAC, who is pro-war, pro nuclear armament. The Attack sequences of the movie comport exactly with his description of the systems at that time.

It is not psychosis or paranoia to know that there are actual missiles programmed to hit every major US city. It is not psychosis to think that if things go somewhat awry, say in Georgia, especially with the current "Big Red Button" staff which includes a VP who inadvertently shot his friend while hunting, we may get vaporized.

Proponents of nuclear energy or armament have been consistently lying. They have been lying about costs, about safety, about waste disposal, about possible and actual issues, and about nuclear "accidents". They speak about fusion as clean, cheap, safe, etc. they have spent billions of tax money, and results have still been coming soon for .. half a century. Yes, it's possible to make helium and power out of water. It is also possible to make gold out of stone.

There is no psychosis or paranoia about this, doctor. Leave people alone, they don't need your "therapy". And we just don't need that nuclear garbage.

I have to agree with the comments of Cullen Klein. Three Mile Island may be the most publicized nuclear event in this country, and it had the potential to affect millions in the Philadelphia to Washington corridor. But by far the most disasterous nuclear event in our history was the explosion and melt down of the SL-1 nuclear reactor at the Idaho IINL test facility. There were as I recall three immediate deaths, but lethal radiation was spread all over the country side. My father was a General Electric accountant stationed out there at the time. Although not present for the explosion, he reported back to work in an unshielded building close to the site. He answered the call for volunteers to relieve the nuclear rated clean up crew, and suited up to go into the hot zone to remove debris. Although kept in their for a minimal time, when he came out and was run through a decontamination process three times, he still showed a high level of radiation when scanned. They finally just told him to "go home." Within three to four years he began experiencing a wide range of severe health problems that went from heart attacks to stroke. He spent nearly 30 years in poor health never quite recovering, and with his doctors never quite understanding what his problem was. He finally died of pulmonary complications, which correlate to exposure to radioactive materials. In contrast to Three Mile Island, people died from the SL-1 meltdown. Perhaps you should consider a show on that.