<html>
<body>
<font size=3>
<a href="http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2010/day020310.html" eudora="autourl">
http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2010/day020310.html<br><br>
</a></font><font size=4><b>Obama's Greening of Plutonium<br>
</b></font><font size=3>by Susie Day <br><br>
(PU) The White House moved today to protect Americans from nuclear
accidents and attack by buying up rights to alarming facts pertaining to
those subjects. Speaking to an enthusiastic audience of the
unemployed, President Obama announced that, in the wake of
<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/17/business/energy-environment/17nukes.html">
federal approval of $8.3 billion in loan guarantees to build two new
nuclear reactors</a>, the U.S. government will begin to secure
<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/nov/26/science-shackles-intellectual-property">
patents</a> on the dire warnings of global catastrophe that have long
plagued the nuclear industry.<br><br>
Mr. Obama said that these gloomy, "anti-nuke" predictions --
radiation poisoning; mass outbreaks of cancer; permanent genetic damage;
the capacity of fuel from even one reactor to make a bomb more
devastating than all the explosives in World War II; the extinction of
life on this planet, etc., etc. -- can now be legally managed by the
Department of Energy, as a form of intellectual property for which
nuclear naysayers would have to pay hefty copyright fees.<br><br>
"For years, scientists and doctors have been blah-blaming about
medical dangers and meltdowns," stated the President.
"They claim that nuclear byproducts, released into the air and
groundwater, cause cancer. That might have been true back in the
'80s, when <a href="http://www.helencaldicott.com/">Helen Caldicott</a>
was young and public condemnation of nuclear power was at its
height. But recent Democratic National Committee polls have shown
that it is these horrifying nuclear statistics themselves that pose the
real danger."<br><br>
Citing recent DNC studies indicating that higher profits create greater
safety, the President continued: "Did you know, for instance, that
just hearing someone say,
'<i>
Cesium-137-in-the-air-or-groundwater-remains-active-for-600-years-and-locates-in-muscle-fiber-producing-sarcoma'</i>
can give you cancer? Now, with our intellectual property laws, we
can legally minimize these health risks, while curbing carbon emissions
with nuclear energy."<br><br>
Although the administration's renewed push for nuclear power is intended
to increase employment and the supply of "clean" energy, it
remains an open secret that Mr. Obama is also using this "nuclear
renaissance" to court broader Republican support.<br><br>
Speaking on condition of anonymity, Secretary of Energy Steven Chu
explained, "Our strategy is simple. We steer the public away
from negative facts like how fossil fuel is essential to every stage of
the nuclear energy cycle, and how we still haven't figured out how to
safely store growing tons of radioactive waste. Instead, we focus
on upbeat messages like how totally great it is that the word
<i>green</i> rhymes with <i>clean</i>."<br><br>
While admitting that the two words do rhyme, most Republicans remain
unmoved by the administration's efforts. "I still think
Obama's a socialist," said Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma.
"If he was really serious about clean energy, he'd send
<a href="http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0415-23.htm">Helen</a>
<a href="http://calitreview.com/19">Caldicott</a> and all those other
solar-powered terrorists to Gitmo."<br><br>
Despite a cool Republican reception, the Obama administration's efforts
to buy the rights to negative information about nuclear power may
actually pay off in the next election. Many American voters,
already lacking jobs, homes, and healthcare, say they would welcome
"big government" interference, if it were to stop them from
thinking about other, more horrific things, especially nuclear things,
which they hardly ever think about anyway.<br><br>
"Sometimes I catch myself <i>almost</i> worrying about strontium-90
in my milk, or a terrorist attack on a reactor," admitted
out-of-work barber Troy Burns of Troy, NY. "Then I remember
that I'd have to pay royalty fees if I complained out loud about all
that, so I stop. Not that I'm totally off science. Like,
don't you think it's cool, how they figured out King Tut died of
malaria?"<br><br>
Actually, under the new patenting guidelines, Troy Burns would be charged
only a minimal fee for disseminating negative information that is already
well documented. He would, however, incur a much heavier fee for
describing appalling nuclear disasters that have not yet come to
pass. Legally, therefore, Mr. Burns would be permitted to describe
deposits of
<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/2004-01-02-babyteeth_x.htm">
strontium-90 in baby teeth</a> for about the price of a large order
McDonald's freedom fries. Conversely, it would cost him
approximately two new cooling towers if he were to publicly decry
<a href="http://money.cnn.com/2009/11/12/news/economy/nuclear_security/index.htm?postversion=2009111209">
the possibility of some terrorist flying a plane into New York's Indian
Point nuclear plant</a>.<br><br>
Predictably, the issue of patents on harrowing nuclear data has attracted
its share of shrill First Amendment detractors. "It's my right
as an American to talk about
<a href="http://www.cooperativeindividualism.org/sagan_nuclear_winter.html">
nuclear winter</a>," asserted Muffy Wentworth, Sierra Club member
and author of the book <i>Nuclear Winter: Sure Way to Beat Global
Warming!<br><br>
</i>"Besides, there's no need to pay royalties on dread nuclear
factoids," added Ms. Wentworth. "As long as we have a
first strike policy, I feel Americans are justified in going into deep
psychological denial about all kinds of horrible things, including
nuclear bombs detonating, ensuing global firestorms with gale-force
winds, followed by interminable years of darkness and drastic cold.
Personally, if I'm feeling a little rage or grief, I just turn on TV and
watch the Violence Channel."<br><br>
The concept of nuclear winter, like similarly inconceivable nuclear
calamities, is also discounted by a growing body of market-driven data
suggesting that, if it hasn't happened yet, it's never going to
happen.<br><br>
President Obama would be the first to agree.<br>
<hr>
<div align="center"></div>
Susie Day is Assistant Editor of
<a href="http://monthlyreview.org/"><i>Monthly Review</a></i>. <br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<br>
</font><x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<font size=3 color="#FF0000">Freedom Archives<br>
522 Valencia Street<br>
San Francisco, CA 94110<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#008000">415 863-9977<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#0000FF">
<a href="http://www.freedomarchives.org/" eudora="autourl">
www.Freedomarchives.org</a></font><font size=3> </font></body>
</html>