Monday, March 28, 2011 | Categories: Day 6 Blog |
Thanks to everyone who wrote to Day 6 this week. Posted below are the e-mails we received about our interview with George Monbiot - which also generated some lively discussion in the comments section on the blog post about the interview. We hope you'll keep the conversation going in the comments section here, or on our Facebook page.
Write Day 6 at Day6@cbc.ca - we love hearing from you. Here are this week's e-mails:
Please speak to someone like Helen Caldicott or Gordon Edwards to refute George Monbiot's pro-nuke ideas, or at least refer listeners to broadcast of March 18 2011 - an impromptu nuclear debate on "The Link" (Radio Canada International). (Here's a link - Day 6)
It's time for Canada to put an end to creating waste from nuclear power - and not just the tons of radioactive tailings waste from mining, and the radioactive waste from the plants which will somehow need to be stored securely for thousands of years. Our ancestors should not have to bear those burdens.
There is also the waste of money and resources being used for hugely expensive and dangerous centralized nuclear technology that encourages over-consumption. Those are resources that we need to put into decentralized and safer renewable energy sources today so we can stop using fossil fuels someday soon.
We should think of what we're leaving for future generations, instead of creating dangerous wastes to fuel consumption that we really don't need.
- Tony R.
Thank you for your thoughtful attention to the disaster in Japan - up to your usual excellent standard. Unfortunately, though, your guest, the "environmentalist" George Monbiot, will have left many listeners with an incorrect impression of the nature of nuclear energy. Mr. Monbiot displayed a scary ignorance of the facts. He appears to believe that the dangers of nuclear radioactivity that the anti-nuclear lobby are concerned with are limited to the immediate effects of exposure, so-called Acute Radiation Sickness. In your interview I did not hear him mention the word "mutation" - damage to the genetic material that causes cancers and other dread diseases. There was no mention of the fact that it takes years after radioactive exposure - five or ten or more - for such illnesses as leukaemia to develop. At least several thousand and possibly hundreds of thousands of people have already been exposed to potentially cancer-producing levels of radiation in the Fukushima area. Furthermore, the effects will also emerge in children and grandchildren of those exposed. Your guest evidently fails to understand that there is absolutely no safe dose of radiation - even minute amounts can cause cancer - and there is absolutely no safe way to dispose of nuclear waste.
Thanks again for your great show.
Stan R Blecher MD
Fellow of the Canadian College of Medical Geneticists
Professor Emeritus, Molecular Biology and Genetics
University of Guelph
Port Hope, Ontario
Dear Brent Bambury,
Thanks for bringing Monibot's position to light--he must be supremely frustrated by the world of inaction on reducing carbon because I've read him on global warming for a long time--with lots of good info. See my comment at end--not even he convinces me nuclear is our only choice instead of coal.
2. And I will look for your interviews with OTHER sources of information--like Canada's own and expert Gordon Edwards! (and Harvey Wasserman and Arnie Gunderson in USA)
Black Diamond, AB
We also got these notes, in response to our Campaign Cocktail story:
I am writing to say how annoyed I am about the coverage of the election call. The CBC and other news organizations keep emphasizing the fact that this is the fourth general election in seven years. They also keep asking whether voters are ready for an election. Indeed, the programme "Day 6" even had a segment on whether the election call was enough to drive voters to drink. How shameful!! You have all (except Susan Delacourt who had an excellent blog in the Toronto Star this past week) been co-opted by the PM's spurious characterization that this election is a bothersome, unnecessary event.
We Canadians are very lucky to have the opportunity to select our leaders. We do not only have the opportunity - we have the right. And, we can exercise that right freely, without risk of violence or retribution. All we need to do is look to the Middle East, North Africa and elsewhere to see that some people are willing to die and risk their freedom for that right. Are you and the PM telling the people in the Middle East and North Africa who have risked their lives seeking the right to have a say in their respective countries that they did so in vain? Are you and the PM telling Aung San Suu Kyi that she spent years under house arrest that she wasted her time seeking democracy in Burma? Are you and the PM telling all these people that the rights they seek are merely bothersome and annoying? I think it behoves all journalists to adopt a more responsible tone. I would urge the same thing for the PM, but I am not sure he's listening as he rants about.
I enjoyed your interview with Sarah Vowell, the U.S./Canada issue is always fun to discuss. Liked the whole show of course, except for the election stuff Frankly I'm already sick of hearing about it. Hopefully it will only have a tiny bit of mention on your show. As little as possible, please.