The Liberty Beacon

The Liberty Beacon

» ENVIRONMENT
 
 

ENVIRONMENT

geoengineering 4

By: Roger Landry (TLB)

Geo-engineering or weather modification is not a myth, a lie or a conspiracy theory. It is in fact a painful and deadly reality. One need only look up on any given day to see large jets crisscrossing the sky from horizon to horizon, leaving chemical or particulate swaths across the brilliant blue heavens, that quickly transform to a putrid gray as the trails spread out and merge.

This phenomenon can be observed in just about any area of the globe we wish to look today … and there are consequences, serious, dangerous and deadly consequences!

TLBTV E4

Watch this great TLBTV discussion with TLB partner and Contributor, Dane Wigington of GeoEngineering Watch as we discuss what could very well be the most vital topic today, and a mechanism that is driving humanity and the global ecosystem to an Extinction Level event …

Aluminum, Barium and other heavy metals (in lesser amounts) continue to rain down from our skies almost daily poisoning the air we breath, our soil and the food we eat.

The drought conditions in California (man made) continues to worsen at an almost exponential rate even though absolute proof can be afforded as to its causation.

UV readings continue to exist at levels dangerous to our biosphere and all living creatures (emphasis on humanity). and are on a steady increase headed straight towards what must inevitably be a mass extinction event.

All of this can be tied directly back to one catalyst … Geo-engineering or Weather Modification.

What are the visible results of the increasing levels of metals (emphasis on aluminum) saturating our air and soil … Increased incidences of Dementia, Alzheimer, Autism and other cognitive dysfunctions.

What are the visible results of the increased levels of UVB radiation exposure … A sick and dying biosphere (bark literally cooking and falling of trees), increased levels of cancer (emphasis on skin cancers) and more.

None of this is tin foil hat territory, and all that has just been said and what you have seen in the TLBTV presentation, is backed by solid and proven scientific data … Yet our health and the biosphere we depend on for our very survival is still being attacked and in many cases the attack escalates. WHY ???

Continue reading this article and see videos here

Please visit Dane for much more vital information here: http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/

****************

The outstanding organization that will be bringing you our show live each week is Conscious Consumer Network TV (CCN)

Watch weekly every Wednesday @ 7:30 EST – live here

Find great programming here: CCN BROADCAST GUIDE

CCN is supporter funded. It is through a great organization like this that our word can be heard and amplified, thus programmed ignorance can be eradicated. Please watch this short video, visit their website, and support this fine organization in any way you can. Because without platforms such as CCN … our voice is severely limited!

TLB Radio David Lewis

TLB presents a great discussion with Dr. David Lewis. Dr. Lewis is a PhD Microbiologist, a thirty year plus veteran of the EPA and author of the book “Science For Sale”. This makes him eminently qualified to discuss matters of environmental pollution, their causes and health or environmental ramifications, as well as the failures, corruption and duplicity within our regulatory and health agencies mandated to protect the American public.

Attached (below recorded discussion) you will also find an article written by Dr. Lewis pertinent to this recorded discussion.

****************

animas-river-before-and-after-epa-toxic-waste-spill

EPA just released new data today, saying its Animas River spill poses no threat to public health. Here are my comments, which I gave to Breitbart News, about EPA’s latest data: EPA’s assurances should be taken in context. The most serious threat is posed by the contaminated river sediments; and EPA is just reporting dissolved metals. Only a tiny fraction of the contamination is dissolved at any given moment.

For now, the dissolved metals are trending downward as the contaminated sediments move downriver toward Lake Powell, where they will settle out. There, low levels of lead, arsenic and other toxic metals will continue to bleed out into the water column for decades or longer, and begin to bio-magnify in wildlife and humans living in and around the lake.

They are far more soluble in fat than water. Over years of exposure, they will accumulate to much higher levels in breast milk and body fat, which can lead to cancer, birth defects, and neurological disorders.

Dr. David Lewis, former EPA senior research scientist.

***************

Click on the TLB Radio Logo To here this Recorded Discussion.

TLB radio

****************

animas-river-after-epa-toxic-waste-spill

The Oconee Enterprise
August 27, 2015
********
Who regulates EPA’s pollution?
David Lewis Science for Sale

The recent blowout at an abandoned gold mine triggered by EPA inspectors in Colorado released millions of gallons of wastes containing lead and arsenic. The pollutants discharged into a creek that joins the Animas River and empties into Lake Powell. Internal records from a private contractor show EPA ignored warnings about the impending disaster. Although EPA claims the spill poses no significant threat, my review of its data suggests otherwise.

As a former senior-level scientist at EPA, I’ve seen this happen again and again. EPA goes after small businesses for minor infractions, while covering up its own mistakes that are far more serious. Most recently, I’ve been dealing with this problem at an old abandoned cotton mill in Greensboro, Georgia.

Data collected by an EPA-funded private contractor reveal that dangerous levels of thirty EPA-listed priority pollutants are buried at the site. They include benzo-a-pyrene, lead, arsenic and other toxic chemicals and heavy metals that can cause cancer, birth defects and neurological disorders.

As an expert witness in a lawsuit against the developer and the City of Greensboro, I testified that a redevelopment plan approved under EPA’s Brownfield Program will flush the hazardous wastes into a nearby creek. Eventually, they will settle out in Lake Oconee and become biomagnified up the food chain, potentially reaching levels millions of times higher in wildlife and humans.

My fears were confirmed in March when workers digging at the site ruptured a city water main, washing large amounts of contaminated soils directly into the creek. Sediment tests showed that lead levels, which were negligible in 2010, had increased a thousand-fold or more. I sent photographs of the excavated soil and broken water main to EPA Regional Administrator Heather McTeer Toney, and asked for technical support from EPA’s regional lab in Athens.

When news of the EPA spill in Colorado broke, Fox News and other media outlets covered similar problems I found with the project in Greensboro, which may be a common occurrence at EPA-funded brownfield sites. Despite knowing defendants paid a large sum of money to settle the lawsuit after I testified, Toney’s office bluffed reporters, saying my allegations about the project polluting the creek in Greensboro were proven wrong in the court case.

This week, EPA’s new Clean Water Rule goes into effect. Unless Congress and federal courts intervene, EPA will start going after businesses and even homeowners if they so much as allow silt to enter ditches, creeks and other pathways feeding into “Waters of the United States.” It opens the door for the federal government, which has a history of using the IRS to target private citizens for political gain, to add EPA to its toolbox. But, as the EPA gains more power over us, who will regulate its pollution?

David Lewis of Watkinsville is Research Director for Focus for Health Foundation in Watchung, NJ, Contributor and Science Adviser for The Liberty Beacon project and author of Science for Sale. The opinions expressed are those of the writer.

****************

Reprinted with the permission of Dr. Lewis and The Oconee Enterprise.

We invite you to visit our Radio Network website The Liberty Beacon Town Crier for more TLB Special shows and shows from other great hosts.

 

 

Obama-Monsanto 1

By: Roger Landry (TLB)

Monsanto is a member of a very exclusive club whereby they enjoy privileged status and protection from their transgressions, regardless of whether these transgressions are based on negligence, bad practices or hidden and altered science. Thus it would appear they are ultimately free to terrorize and bully competing farmers completely out of their livelihood, with these same farmers unable to defend themselves, or continuously unsuccessful at retaliation via the law.

Here we find the most dangerous non military industry existing today on issues of critical health and environmental hazards, with what appears to be just about zero accountability, and total support by an extremely corrupt and complicit government including the Supreme Court, Congress and the Executive branch (a perfect trifecta). Their Teflon coating extends far beyond the reach of any citizen or organized protest group.

Here are a few examples of the blatant conflicts of interest that should never be allowed to exist within a government or health/regulatory agencies mandated to serve and protect We The People …

michael-taylor

And another blatant example …

Clarence Thomas

And one more for good measure …

Monsantos revolving door

Today a virtual cornucopia of recent and peer reviewed research proves unequivocally the lurking dangers with GMO’s, but this means absolutely nothing to this government so entrenched in complicity.

As more and more of the rest of the world bans or severely restricts Monsanto’s dangerous and even deadly products to protect their environment and citizens, our government, supposedly bound by that same concept of representing the will of, and protecting the health of, We The People, ignores these issues, and supports this entity knowing full well the massive harm to Americans and the biosphere they are responsible for!

Well just how can they accomplish this continuous rein of bio-terror …

When you own the mechanism that makes the laws … You can easily exist outside those laws !!!

Are you freaking ANGRY yet ???

Monsanto’s Government Orgy

Abby Martin takes a closer look at the incestuous relationship between the White House and Monsanto, by calling out Romney and Obama’s longstanding ties with the company.

“Monsanto has a very incestuous relationship with the U.S. government which goes back decades…”

See original video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbhtUhebzic

45-460

by TLB Contributor: Dane Wigington

Climate Engineering has been increasingly disrupting and derailing Earth’s natural systems for over six decades. The scope and scale of the ongoing geoengineering planetary assault is now on a level that defies true comprehension. Climate engineering is creating and fueling radically increasing climate forcing scenarios which are impacting ever aspect of the biosphere’s life support processes. To give some perspective to this statement, Atlantic basin hurricanes have been actively suppressed and/or steered away from US coastlines for a decade. Has anyone stopped to wonder why there have been no major hurricane landfalls in the US for over ten years in spite of record warm oceans? Even though there was a record shattering year of US hurricane activity in 2005, and no major landfalls since? Record cyclones are occurring in the Western Pacific, how can the US be exempt from such activity? This is the degree of power the weathermakers have over the climate system. Though there are countless sources of anthropogenic damage to the planet, climate engineering is the most impactful of all. Major and dire changes are now unfolding on our planet. The thermohaline circulation is slowing down in the North Atlantic, this comes with dire implications. Is this an objective for the geoengineers? Or simply one more disastrous unintended consequence from the geoengineering juggernaut of total insanity? The author of the article below unfortunately is not willing to address the issue of climate engineering. This being said, the data he covers is real and very relevant. The walls continue to close in, make your voice heard in the battle to expose and halt climate engineering.

Signs Of Gulf Stream Slowdown — Sea Level More Than A Foot Higher Off US East Coast

Source: Robert Scribbler

It’s the stuff that climate disaster movies are made of. But the events are all too real — happening now and not part of some dramatized script played out on the silver screen.

Signs abound that global ocean circulation is being profoundly altered by human-forced climate change. A pool of cold water has developed in the North Atlantic. England is getting slammed by anomalous winter-type rains and gales in August. And sea surface heights off the US East Coast are more than 30 centimeters (one foot) above the 1979 to 2015 average.

Click image for animation

sea-level-anomalies-30-cm-off-us-east-coast-460

Global sea surface height anomalies off the US East Coast are more than a foot (30 cm) above the 1979 to 2015 average. A clear sign that the Gulf Stream is slowing down, perhaps by as much as 15-30 percent. Complete shut down of the Gulf Stream, though unlikely without extremely large melt outflows from Greenland, would result in a very dangerous 1 meter sea level rise. An impact that is primarily driven by ocean current change. Sea level rise by thermal expansion and glacial melt would, necessarily, pile on top of this bulge of backed up waters. Image source: NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center.

World Ocean Heartbeat Fading

This past March, after observations of rising sea levels off the US East Coast, extreme positive sea surface temperature anomalies in the same region, and a critical slowing down of North Atlantic over-turning recorded throughout the 20th Century, Professor Stefan Rahmstorf published this earth-shattering paper in the scientific journal Nature.

The paper meticulously recorded a slow-down of bottom water formation in a region of the Atlantic Ocean south of Greenland. The period studied included all of the 20th Century and the first one and one half decades of the 21st Century. Rahmstorf concluded that Greenland ice sheet melt — starting around 1900 and spiking after 1975 — was having a profound impact. Cold, fresh water issuing out from Greenland was cutting off the flow of heavier, salty water transported northward by the Gulf Stream. It was preventing larger portions of that water from sinking. And it was slowing down the Gulf Stream together with a host of other ocean circulation driving currents.

A system vital to both the life and health of the world ocean and global weather stability was entering an arrest. In other words, the world ocean heartbeat was fading.

The Gulf Stream Train Wreck

Since the publication of Rahmstorf’s paper, evidence of a bottom water formation interruption and a subsequent Gulf Stream train wreck continued to pile up. Sea surface temperatures off the US East Coast, during summer time spiked to as high as 85 Fahrenheit (29.3 C) off the coasts of New York and New Jersey. And regions off Nantucket hit as high as 80 degrees Fahrenheit (26 C). That’s between 7-10 F (4-6 C) hotter than average for an already typically warm Gulf Stream.

Ocean-Heat-map-460

 

Left frame image shows Gulf Stream waters spiking to 29.3 C or 85 F off New York and New Jersey. Temperatures in the range of 7-10 F [4-6 C] above average. Right frame image shows cool pool development in the typical bottom water formation zone between Greenland, England and Newfoundland. Combined with the ocean current overlay, which shows widespread meandering, this hot south, cold north ocean surface dipole is an indication that the Gulf Stream is slowing down and that bottom water formation is weakening. Image source: Earth Nullschool.

Further north, the opposite is happening. In the region east of the Grand Banks where the Gulf Stream currents typically flow strongly, there’s only a weak, meandering, confluence. The Gulf Stream appears to have hit a barrier. It has bottled up off the Northeastern US Coast. And it appears reluctant or unable to flow past mid-ocean.

As a result, a broad zone between England, the Southeastern Coast of Greenland and Newfoundland lack the warm, salty inflow of a strong Gulf Stream. Sea surface temperatures range from 2-7 F (1 to 4 C) below average. The northward progress of heat from the Gulf Stream is tapering off. And this cut off of heat flow from Equator to mid latitudes shows more and more as the development of an anomalous cool pool continues throughout.

Taking in the entire North Atlantic, what we see is a weather-destabilizing hot-cold dipole. The warm waters are backed up off the US East Coast. This is evidenced by both the very warm sea surface temperatures and by an extreme increase in sea surface heights by 1 foot over a broad region. And to the north, we have the climate change signature cool pool.

Anomalous Storms Strike England During Summer

This Gulf Stream train wreck and related cool pool development has already done a bit of a number on UK weather this summer. A series of gales and heavy rainstorms have slammed into the UK Coast — bringing heavy seas and torrential rains. One months worth of rainfall fell over parts of the UK during the past week alone. And with more storms on the way it appears that August of 2015 may be the wettest ever recorded.

It’s a changed climate state that Dr. James Hansen warned of in a recent paper. One that means more powerful storms for the North Atlantic as the Greenland Ice Sheet spews out greater and greater volumes of water and ice. Ever since 2012, we’ve seen a tendency for these kinds of anomalously powerful storms. And more rough weather is certainly on the way.

storms-reshape-englands-coastline-460

During the winter of 2013 and 2014, storms reshaped the coastlines of the British Isles. But this was just the start. For the North Atlantic is now in the process of firing up an age of storms. Image source: AGU.

The Fall forecast is calling for the strong gales that we’ve already seen to continue to intensify through at least October and November. Strong storms that will draw energy by the high differences in sea surface temperatures in the North Atlantic, but also, possibly, from an El Nino-amplified storm track causing powerful troughs to begin to dig in off the US East Coast. A situation that could set up a kind of trans-Atlantic storm firing line.

The long term forecast, however, is even worse. With Greenland just beginning to shed more and more of its ice, the cool pool off England will tend to intensify even as the hot pool off the US East Coast and within the Gulf of Mexico heightens. A screaming, storm-generating temperature differential that such melt will worsen as the decades wear on and if human fossil fuel burning continues to add more heat fuel to this already developing dangerous situation.

Links:
NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center
Rahmstorf– AMOC is Slowing Down
World Ocean Heartbeat is Fading
Earth Nullschool
Even Chances August Will Be Wettest on Record for The UK
Warning From Scientists — Halt Fossil Fuel Burning or Age of Storms, Rapid Sea Level Rise is Coming
North Atlantic Ramping up to “Storms of My Grandchildren?”
AGU
Fall Forecast: Storms Target UK, France

Source: Robert Scribbler

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

See featured article here

TLB recommends you visit Dane at GeoEngineering Watch for more great articles and pertinent information.

pic34

by TLB Contributor: Dane Wigington

As the global economic house of cards continues to collapse with increasing momentum, the vast majority of global populations are, unfortunately, still looking through a very tainted and distorted lens. They cannot bring themselves to accept reality on countless fronts. Denial is especially tenacious in regard to the ongoing climate engineering atrocities occurring in our skies. Our sense of reason is our greatest gift, but for most this sense has long ago been overridden by societal conditioning, programming, and propaganda. The image below is of Dubai, a city built on sand, powered by finite fossil fuels complete with toxic geoengineered skies.

2

The Burj Khalifa is the glittering jewel in Dubai’s construction crown. Photo Credit: Iwan Baan

 The implosion of the temporary reality we have all known is already well under way, the collapsing Chinese stock markets are only a harbinger of what is to come. Global shipping is in free-fall as shipping rates plunge, unlimited money printing can no longer hide what is unfolding around the world.  China has kept its deceptive GDP (Gross Domestic Product) going in the past in the same manner as the rest of the global economy – with smoke, mirrors, and lies. “Ghost cities” were one of the methods used by the Chinese to keep the illusion of growth going. Now, the inevitable is taking hold, the illusion is disintegrating by the day. The images below are cities with no inhabitants which were constructed to keep the wheels of industry turning and the GDP rising in the East.

pic3

An eerily vacant Yingkou is only one of numerous ghost cities in China

pic4

The Chinese have constructed ghost cities in locations as far away as Angola

 The image below is from what has been termed “The scariest housing bubble”

A general view of newly-built houses at Dadun village of Lingshui ethnic Li autonomous county

The largely empty city of Ordos in inner Mongolia

 The completely out of control manufacturing of automobiles to create the illusion of a recovering auto industry is an extension of the Chinese ghost cities philosophy.

35

Above is an image of thousands upon thousands of unsold cars parked up on a airport runway near St Petersburg in Russia.  They are all imported from Europe, and then parked and left to rot. Consequently, the airport is now unusable for its original purpose.

 The end of the reality we have all known draws nearer at blinding speed. Those who cannot see this inevitability will very soon have their eyes opened, they will have no choice but to face the truth. Modern society is comparable to a snake eating its own tail. In the last 40 years the human population has doubled while global wildlife populations have declined by over 50% in the same amount of time, is it rational to believe such a trend could continue?  The epitome of human insanity is the attempt to manipulate the climate, the attempt to control Earth’s very life support systems.

 

pic45-460

Geoengineered aerosol skies over New York City

Industrialized civilization is the mechanism by which climate engineering has been conducted and perpetuated. If the total collapse of this paradigm brings an end to the geoengineering juggernaut of planetary omnicide (and an end to countless destructive factors related to militarized civilization), is that not a step forward for what is yet left of life on Earth? The global elite have long since been preparing for total collapse which their own actions and governance has helped to fuel from the beginning. We all have a responsibility to face reality head-on. Only in doing so will we have any chance of altering the outcome of what is unfolding in a positive direction. If our existence is not about fighting for the greater good (regardless of the odds), what is it about? If it is not about fighting for the future of our children, then what right did we have to bring them into the world? We owe our lives to the children and to the planet they will need to survive. If we can expose and halt climate engineering before the power structure is ready for this to happen, before global collapse is total, we could yet change the outcome. If all of us work together, without fear and trepidation, with focus and conviction, who can say what we may still accomplish for the greater good even at this dark hour. Make your voice heard while there is yet time.
DW

See featured article here

TLB recommends you visit Dane at GeoEngineering Watch for more great articles and pertinent information.

arrowhead_logoThe Arrowhead Mountain Water Company bottling plant, owned by Swiss conglomerate Nestle, on the Morongo Indian Reservation near Cabazon, Calif.

By: Claire Bernish

Nestle has found itself more and more frequently in the glare of the California drought-shame spotlight than it would arguably care to be — though not frequently enough, apparently, for the megacorporation to have spontaneously sprouted a conscience.

Drought-shaming worked sufficiently enough for Starbucks to stop bottling water in the now-arid state entirely, uprooting its operations all the way to Pennsylvania. But Nestle simply shrugged off public outrage and then upped the ante by increasing its draw from natural springs — most notoriously in the San Bernardino National Forest with an absurdly expired permit.

Because profit, of course. Or, perhaps more befittingly, theftBut you get the idea.

Nestle has somehow managed the most sweetheart of deals for its Arrowhead 100% Mountain Spring Water, which is ostensibly sourced from Arrowhead Springs — and which also happens to be located on public land in a national forest.

In 2013, the company drew 27 million gallons of water from 12 springs in Strawberry Canyon for the brand — apparently by employing rather impressive legerdemain — considering the permit to do so expired in 1988.

But, as Nestle will tell you, that really isn’t cause for concern since it swears it is a good steward of the land and, after all, that expired permit’s annual fee has been diligently and faithfully paid in full — all $524 of it.

And that isn’t the only water it collects. Another 51 million gallons of groundwater were drawn from the area by Nestle that same year.

There is another site the company drains for profit while California’s historic drought rages on: Deer Canyon. Last year, Nestle drew 76 million gallons from the springs in that location, which is a sizable increase over 2013’s 56 million-gallon draw — and under circumstances just as questionable as water collection at Arrowhead.

This extensive collection of water is undoubtedly having detrimental effects on the ecosystem and its numerous endangered and threatened species, though impact studies aren’t available because they were mysteriously stopped before ever getting underway.

In fact, the review process necessary to renew Nestle’s antiquated permit met a similarly enigmatic termination: once planning stages made apparent the hefty price tag and complicated steps said review would entail, the review was simply dropped. Completely. Without any new stipulations or stricter regulations added to the expired permit that Nestle was ostensibly following anyway — though, obviously, that remains an open question.

In 2014, Nestle used roughly 705 million gallons of water in its operations in California, according to natural resource manager Larry Lawrence. That’s 2,164 acre-feet of water — enough to “irrigate 700 acres of farmland” or “fill 1,068 Olympic-sized swimming pools,” as Ian James pointed out in The Desert Sun.

Though there is no way to verify exactly how much Nestle must spend to produce a single bottle of Arrowhead spring water, the astronomical profit is undeniable fact: the most popular size of a bottle of Arrowhead 100% Mountain Spring Water (1 liter) retails for 89¢ — putting the potential profit for Nestle in the tens of billions.

Activists have called for a boycott of Nestle Waters and all Nestle products until they are held accountable for their actions in California.

There is much more to be revealed in future articles as the investigation into Nestle’s reckless profit-seeking during California’s unprecedented drought continues.

IN-DEPTH: Forest Service Official Who Let Nestle Drain California Water Now Works for Them

RELATED: Nestle Being Sued for $100 Million Dollars Over Hazardous Lead in Food

****************

Claire Bernish joined Anti-Media as an independent journalist in May of 2015. Her topics of interest include social justice, police brutality, exposing the truth behind propaganda, and general government accountability. Born in North Carolina, she now lives in Ohio. Learn more about Bernish here!

****************

TLB recommends you visit THE ANTI MEDIA for more pertinent articles and information.

See featured article here.

08.24.15 Gender Confusion

By Leslie Carol Botha, WHE

This is a tough post to write… and at the same time it is probably one of the most important posts I have ever written.  I have had articles saved for weeks on this… but could not seem to muster the writing needed to make you all aware that we are living in dangerous times. And then I had an email from my friend and colleague Christina England alerting me to the fact that estradiol (a bioidentical hormone extracted from yam or soy)  has been discovered in polio vaccines being given to children in Kenya. Christina asked me to provide links to articles regarding the dangers of estradiol – and asked my thoughts on the matter – especially in regards to males receiving these vaccines and the risk to their fertility.  And that my friends prompted me to write what has to be written.

I have been aware of the dangers of xenoestrogens in our environment for quite some time.  Many of us have been sounding the alarm on this – and we have begun to see the ravaging effects of what has been called “gender-bending chemicals.” Bear with me gentle reader as I take you down the road to gender confusion.

The web site, Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families reports:

In the U.S. today, there is increasing concern that environmental contaminants may be harming the reproductive health and fertility of women and men. Reproductive and fertility problems appear to be on the rise.

In women:

  • At least 12% of women reported difficulty in conceiving and maintaining pregnancy in 2002, an increase of 40% from 1982. From 1982 to 1995, the prevalence of infertility almost doubled in younger women, ages 18–25. A recent update concludes that the trend may have leveled off, although there is disagreement on this.
  • Fibroids and other fertility-related diseases, like endometriosis and polycystic ovarian syndrome, are diagnosed more frequently now, which may be the result of a true increase, better detection, or both.

In men:

  • According to a large study of men from the Boston area, testosterone levels in adult men are declining. This decline is not explained by an increase in age or other health or lifestyle factors such as obesity or smoking.
  • Testicular cancer increased by 60% between 1973 and 2003 in the U.S.
  • Sperm counts have declined in men in some areas of the U.S., Europe, and Australia.

In children:

  • In U.S. girls, puberty is beginning earlier than in the past. A weight-of-the-evidence evaluation of human and animal studies suggests that endocrine-disrupting chemicals, particularly estrogen mimics and anti-androgens, as well as increased body fat and certain social circumstances, can advance the onset of puberty.
  • Reproductive tract abnormalities are increasing in certain populations. In one analysis of two U.S. surveillance systems, cryptorchidism (undescended testicle(s)) increased 200% between 1970 and 1993. In some surveillance systems, the incidence of hypospadias (deformity of the penis) has increased, whereas in others, increases have leveled off.

Research is showing that elevated levels of exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals are associated with adverse effects on reproductive measures and birth outcomes in the general population, including reduced sperm quality in men, premature birth, low birth weight, and behavioral changes in children.

The alarm was initially sounded in the 1990’s with the result of a Danish study pointed out the dangers of these “gender-bending” chemicals early in life.

In 1992  Dr Niels Skakkebaek, analyzed the results of all the studies of sperm production that had been conducted since the 1930s. These types of  studies are known as a meta-analysis studies that compare global data and research and and are helpful in identifying trends.

The Danish doctor published his results in the British Medical Journal, concluding that sperm counts had been falling by 1% a year since 1930 and that infertility was rising. In fact, the World Health Organization confirms the analysis acknowledging that between 8 and 10% of couples of reproductive age have some form of fertility problem.

CHEMICALS FOUND IN HOUSEHOLD PRODUCT CONTAIN CHEMICAL ESTROGENS

Two-year-old children are being exposed to dangerous levels of hormone-disrupting chemicals in domestic products such as rubber clogs and sun creams, according to an EU investigation being studied by the government.

The 327-page report says that while risks from “anti-androgen” and “oestrogen-like” substances in individual items have been recognised, the cumulative impact of such chemicals, particularly on boys, is being ignored.

Phthalates, one of the main anti-androgen chemicals, which are used as softeners in soap, rubber shoes, bath mats and soft toys, have been blamed for blocking the action of testosterone in the womb and are alleged to cause low sperm counts, high rates of testicular cancer and malformations of the sexual organs.

Research has suggested that male foetuses around 8-12 weeks after conception can be effectively demasculinised by exposure to such chemicals.

The Danish study, Survey and Health Assessment of the exposure of two-year-olds to chemical substances in consumer products, concludes: “A few exposures to a high content of an endocrine-disruptor, such as that of [the phthalate] DBP in rubber clogs may result in a critical risk for the two-year-old.

“…The amounts that two-year-olds absorb from the [preservative] parabens propylparaben and butylparaben can constitute a risk for oestrogen-like disruptions of the endocrine system. This contribution originates predominantly from cosmetic products such as oil-based creams, moisturising creams, lotions and sunscreen.

“Not only is there a need to reduce exposure to anti-androgens and oestrogen-like substances from food products, indoor air and dust, but also to reduce exposure to [domestic] products, as these contribute to both indoor air and dust and to direct exposure.

“There is also a need to reduce possible contributions from other sources, such as propyl-, butyl- and isobutyl paraben in cosmetics, and phthalates in footwear (such as light-weight sandals and rubber boots).”

And what type of sandals are you wearing? What type of sandals/shoes are your children wearing? We also know that endocrine-disrupting chemicals are found in hormone birth control, laundry dryer sheets, shampoos, perfumes, cosmetics, household cleaners, pesticides – like glyphosate in Monsanto’s Roundup now being banned in countries around the world.

Mercury as an Endocrine Disruptor

Mercury has been found to be an endocrine system disrupting chemical in animals and people, disrupting function of the pituitary gland, thyroid gland, parathyroid gland, thymus gland, adrenal gland, pineal gland, enzyme production processes, and affecting many hormonal and enzymatic functions at very low levels of exposure. The hypothalamus in the brain controls hormone secretions by the pituitary gland. Mercury has been found to commonly accumulate in the hypothalamus, affecting hormone secretions of the pituitary or thyroid gland and many bodily functions.08.24.15 Wetland Habitats

The BBC news reported that 2010 that mercury exposure was affecting the behavior of white ibises by “turning them homosexual,” with higher doses resulting in males being more likely to pair with males.

Scientists in Florida and Sri Lanka studied the effect of mercury in the birds’ diet. Their aim was to find out why it reduced the ibises’ breeding.

Mercury pollution can come from burning coal and waste, and run-off from mines.

The report, in Proceedings of the Royal Society B, shows that wetland birds are particularly badly affected by it.

Although the researchers already knew that eating mercury-contaminated food could affect an animal’s development, they were surprised by the “strange” results of this experiment.

“We knew mercury could depress their testosterone (male sex hormone) levels,” explained Dr Peter Frederick from the University of Florida, who led the study. “But we didn’t expect this.”

In 2013, a writer for The Christian Post wrote a commentary citing:

 According to Associated Press reports, “California has become the first state to enshrine certain rights for transgender K-12 students in state law, requiring public schools to allow those students access to whichever restroom and locker room they want.” Additionally, The new law gives students the right “to participate in sex-segregated programs, activities and facilities based on their self-perception and regardless of their birth gender.”

It appears that someone is aware – very aware of a momentous shift taking place in our society that is causing gender confusion in our children. Could it be that the gender-bending chemicals and heavy metals that have accumulated in our environment are the culprit….

The Coming Out of Caitlyn Jenner

There were many of us concerned about all the media play Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner received over his/her shift to being a woman. A recent UK article came out saying that even those in the transgender community – have concerns over Jenner’s admissions. 08.24.15 jENNER.

But, as a new video by Cut.com reveals, a number of transgender people are still incredibly apprehensive, concerned and even angry about the impact that 65-year-old Caitlyn’s very-public transition has had, and will continue to have, on the community.

A number of the video’s participants admit they are unsure how they really feel about Caitlyn; some feel that her public profile and ongoing reality series is only serving to trivialize the experience of so many other transgender people, while others express hope that her fame will eventually help to shine a much-needed light on the community.

Was all of this mainstream media being used to warn the public of the coming gender shift. Seriously, how many years did it take for us to embrace gay marriages… and now transgender is being thrown in front of us. Do not get me wrong… I do not have a problem with transgender people… and I have known many…. I am looking at this as an environmentally-induced trend that we need to be aware of.

It’s a Girl – or Is She a He?

Think this is a stretch? Think again. I June 30th I sat down to watch Frontline on PBS – and to my shock and dismay it was a long segment entitled “Growing up Trans – An intimate look at the struggles and choices facing transgender kids and their families.”08.24.15 Growing Up Trans

This is a much bigger issue than previously thought. Children are now being born with confusion over their identity and their body’s.  Girls are identifying as boys… meaning that ‘boys’ now have a vagina instead of a penis…. and will menstruate… and have the ability to carry a pregnancy to term. Boys are identifying as girls – meaning that ‘girls’ will have a penis. Whatever it is parents’ are profoundly confused, angry, and scared. Knowing a child’s sex during pregnancy…. has just become obsolete.

And because these children are so confused about their identity, they are being put on sex castration hormone therapy (they call it hormone blockers) to delay puberty. Say what? One doctor in the segment, even stated: “I hope we know what we are doing.”

While transgender adults have taken hormones sometimes for years, the generation growing up now is among the first to start taking hormones so young. Since most people who start hormones take them for life, doctors say there also isn’t enough research into the long-term impact of taking estrogen or testosterone for what could end up being 50 to 70 years.

“There are so many unanswered questions around the long-term consequences, and whether your health risk profile really becomes that of a male or female,” Garofalo says. “If we start testosterone today, will you have the cardiac risk profile of a male or female as you grow older? Will you develop breast cancer because we’re administering estrogen?”

This is unchartered territory. They are delaying puberty until a child is 100% sure of which sex they want to identify with. There is even a heartbreaking segment of a child who know feels he/she mad the wrong choice about their sexual identity.

You can watch the entire production or you can read the script for each segment.

Growing up Trans…. can be viewed here: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/growing-up-trans/

Welcome to a Brave New World… How much of this gender confusion is due to gender-bending chemicals in the environment? Our hormones are getting very mixed signals due to the amount of xenoestrogens in our environment. And now estradiol is being used in vaccines?

Where do we go from here?

Source:

Reproductive Health and Fertility Problems

Danish Scientific Study Calls for Regulation of Chemical Estrogens

Mercury ‘turns’ wetland birds such as ibises homosexual

Gender Confusion and Moral Rebellion

‘Inept… Privileged… Goddess': Transgender people reveal how they REALLY feel about Caitlyn Jenner in brutally-honest video

When Transgender Kids Transition, Medical Risks are Both Known and Unknown

 

Related Article…

Parents Sue Doctors For Deciding Their Kid Is A Girl

According to the Intersex Society of North America, being born with both genitalia is not as rare as we believe; as many as one in 2,000 babies are believed to be born intersex. And now, people are speaking out more openly about the effects of reassignment surgery before a child is able to make their own choice about their identity.

 

Original article found here

 

 

chemtrails 7

Listen to TLB Special (recorded) show below this article

By: Roger Landry (TLB)

So you wake up in the morning to a beautiful day, the sky is clear, the sun is shining, a mild breeze is blowing, and all is perfect in Whoville. Then you notice several high flying jets crisscrossing the sky endlessly and leaving long trails in their wake. Within hours the trails have all expanded and merged to the point where the once beautiful and clear sky is now a blanket of putrid gray … What just happened?

Now if you try to discuss this with most people who have no basis in scientific reality, or are so propagandized into a state of ignorance, that they will tell you all this is a result of persistent contrails … BULL-CRAP !!!

So lets climb down this rabbit hole …

Try to count the number of trails in this picture, and then try to tell me this is any kind of an insane holding pattern or flight path.

Chemtrails 3

Try to explain the persistence of these trails (many hours) when the humidity at altitude is insufficient to support them.

chemtrails 4

Try to tell me these precise patterns laid are not for maximum area coverage as the trails expand.

chemtrails 6

Try to tell me these images above are persistent turbo fan contrails !!!

High Bypass Turbofan jet engines cannot produce persistent contrails because of the high pressure that exists at the exhaust. This is due to the front intake fan acting in the same fashion as a propeller would. The turbofan is the thruster mechanism (about 90% thrust from fan), with not as much of the thrust coming from the turbine exhaust as most would think! All of the modern commercial jets, and most of the large military craft use the high bypass turbofan jet engine for propulsion.

A huge factor in persistent contrails is the relative humidity at altitude.

So Contrails or Chemtrails? We present you now with an individual who is willing to put his money where his mouth and research is!

Please read and listen to the attached article and recorded TLB Special with special guest Mike McCoy …

****************

By TLB Contributor: Michael McCoy

I retired and sixty seven years old. I was born and raised in Buffalo, New York. I graduated from HS in 1965 and without the money to go to college I was draft eligible. I decided to join and get it over with. I scored vary high on the AFQT in the 98th percentile. I was eligible for any job in the Army. After meeting a man who had lost an arm in Vietnam I decided to go into the Airborne Infantry to fight for my country. At eighteen I had a huge patriotic mind. I was blessed to survive heavy combat.

Upon returning stateside I married a girl I had dated one time before going overseas. She had written me and was still unattached when I returned. We have been married 48 years. While still in the Army I went to night school and graduated with a BA in Business. I left the Army after 13 years and went to work for a major Pharmaceutical Firm. I did MBA studies at Pepperdine and learned to read scientific studies. I read hundreds of them and even taught doctors (CME Classes) based on the science.

I never was any kind of activist until I was made aware of the weather modification and chemical spraying going on right above my head. I started to read the science behind persistent ice crystal contrails and after some study realized the government was lying about the incessant spraying going on all over the country and in many foreign countries.

This is how the study I conducted in Las Vegas came to be the center of my $10,000.00 Challenge. It was obvious the humidity here was much to low to allow Ice Crystal Persistent Contrails to form.

When you view my video please note there is an error in the temperature needed to form persistent ice crystal contrails. The true temp required is -40c or lower, not 40c as I mention. It is a moot point anyway as I conceded that the temperature on my study days was low enough at all times above 26K feet. In other words the temperature was not a consideration, we are discussing relative humidity here.

I would ask you all to post my video on weather channels and activist sights you belong to. I would also let you know that the humidity is too low in most areas to the country to support ice crystal contrails that persist.

Please consider doing your own study wherever you reside.

My thanks go out to Roger Landry the tireless fighter for truth and director of The Liberty Beacon project.

****************

Click on the TLB Radio Logo to hear this recorded show.

TLB radio

****************

chemtrails 8

nuclear-energy

TLB Preface:

What you are about to read and watched tool place about a year ago with very little fanfare. The future of nuclear power-plants in America as they are retired, is a huge quandary with respect to responsibility, liability or safety. What we may see approaching is the perfect storm for disaster in our communities across America with these shut down (but still highly radioactive) plants.

We could very well be talking about disasters of the Chernobyl scale or worse in the case of say an earthquake or terrorist strike breaching containment. Yet the nuclear industry is trying to shed itself of all future cost and responsibility for maintenance and disaster planning … due to COST! Let us reap the profit … then get the hell out of Dodge …

This is a must watch video in reflection of the disasters we have already witnessed unfolding across this planet … Or God help Humanity!

****************

Margaret Harrington, Nuclear Free Future

Margaret Harrington, host of Nuclear Free Future on Channel 17 BCAT, speaks with Arnie Gundersen about fuel pools, emergency planning and nuclear power subsidies. Hat tips to US Senators Sanders and Markey for introducing a bill requiring emergency planning continue after closure. Entergy and the other nuclear power operators are proposing they be exempt from any emergency plans after a reactor is closed, because they say there is no risk. But the taxpayer is still paying for Price-Anderson insurance, because there is risk. The industry can’t have it both ways. If they want to eliminate emergency planning, then it’s time they pay for their own insurance.

Transcript

MH:    This is Burlington and here we are in the Channel 17 newsroom for our ongoing Nuclear Free Future conversation. I’m Margaret Harrington, your host. And viewers welcome with me Arnie Gundersen, the Chief Engineer of Fairewinds Energy Education, who has been on our show before. Welcome back, Arnie.

AG:     Hi, Margaret. I’m glad I’m here.

MH:    Thank you. And I’m so happy that we have chosen for the title of this show “Nuclear Industry – Profit before Public Safety.” And we can cut to the chase on this and look at the press release in the Vermont Digger on-line newspaper, the independent newspaper. There was a press release put out 5 days ago that says “Senators to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission” – and this includes Senator Leahy and Senator Bernie Sanders from Vermont, and four other senators – and it says senators to NRC do not exempt decommissioning nuclear reactors from emergency response and security measures. So what does that mean, Arnie? What is going on? Is it in reference to Vermont Yankee and other decommissioning reactors?

AG:     This is a real big deal, because 5 nuclear plants – 4 shut down last year, and at least Vermont Yankee and perhaps others will shut down this year. And it’s something that no one ever faced before. So what’s happening is nuclear plants are shutting down, and the utilities don’t want to spend the money on emergency planning after the nuclear plants are shut down. So they’ve convinced the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that they don’t need any emergency plans when the nuclear plant has reached the end of its life and it’s being mothballed.

MH:    This is amazing that they should try to do this, because emergency plans include evacuation plans and all kinds of things. Could you run us through some of the emergency plans?

AG:     Yeah, let’s talk about Vermont Yankee, which is the identical reactor to Fukushima. The fuel pool will have 37 years worth of nuclear fuel in it, and that’s the equivalent of 700 Hiroshima bombs worth of radioactive material. One would think that you’d want an emergency plan to make sure that there’s no problem with the fuel pool. When a nuclear plant shuts down, all of the safety systems are deactivated and the fuel pool has no safety systems. It’s considered non-safety related. So what that means is that in the event you lose off-site power – and that happens – we all experience the lights going out for longer periods of time – the fuel pool would begin to boil and left long enough, could burn. And that’s what happened at Fukushima Daiichi unit 4 that caused the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to evacuate out for 50 miles. So just because a nuclear plant has shut down doesn’t mean it’s safe. There’s 700 bombs worth of nuclear material sitting in the fuel pool. But here in Vermont – and a hat tip to Bernie Sanders and Patrick Leahy – both our senators – for trying to convince the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that this is not a good idea. (3:38) We have the most hazardous material known to mankind and you’re saying there’s no need for an emergency plan. So they’re trying to push the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to maintain an emergency plan at Vermont Yankee.

MH:    So presently Vermont Yankee has an emergency plan which they can activate in case of an emergency.

AG:     Right. Any operating plant has to have – out to 10 miles, they have to be able to evacuate people on the order of 2 or 3 hours. They’ve got to get everybody out of a 10-mile zone. But what Entergy is saying is that they don’t need to worry about the people outside of the plant boundary after the plan has permanently shut down. Now there’s an interesting dichotomy there because they want to keep the taxpayer-funded nuclear insurance. So they want us to pay their insurance in the event there is an accident, but they are claiming there can’t be an accident because the plant’s already shut down. So my opinion is, if you’re going to allow them to eliminate their emergency plan, then it stands to reason that they don’t need taxpayers to pay their insurance, either. And they don’t want that. There’s a fundamental problem. If you’re running a nuclear plant, you want that Price Andersen insurance because no insurance company in the world is going to accept the risk.

MH:    So presently the taxpayer is paying this Price Andersen insurance.

AG:     Yup. You and I and everybody in the country are on the hook for – if there’s a nuclear accident, the first 10 billion dollars are paid for by the nuclear industry. That sounds like a lot of money, except that Fukushima Daiichi cost 500 billion dollars. So the taxpayers would be on the hook for 490 billion dollars in nuclear costs. And that’s money that insurance companies will not insure. That’s a risk they will not take. So through well-funded lobbyists, the nuclear industry has convinced Congress that we should pay – you and I and everybody in Vermont and everybody in Wisconsin and everybody in Texas.

MH:    Okay. I didn’t understand about what the Price Andersen insurance is. It’s particularly for nuclear.

AG:     It’s the only reason nuclear plants continue to operate. What happened in the 50’s – two Senators – Price and Andersen – realized that to get the industry going, there was no actuarial basis about accidents. So they had five years worth of insurance. And that was called Price Andersen Insurance. Well, every five years – and that was paid for by citizens – every five years, Congress has renewed that again and again and again. And there’s a bill working its way up to the floor by Bernie Sanders that is going to try to force the industry to pay for its own insurance. They’ve been at this now for 70 years. You would think that they’d have a good basis to go to an insurance company and say it’s time that we pay the insurance. But that’s one of these hidden subsidies in nuclear power. (7:10) The owners want all the profit and they want to minimize the cost. Well, if you and I are paying for their insurance, that’s effectively minimizing their cost.

MH:    And the decommissioning process for Vermont Yankee and for the other nuclear reactors, they are pulling out, then, on all of these things, if they can under the good wishes of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

AG:     Yeah, the lax guidance of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is allowing these companies to eliminate their emergency planning staff despite the fact that the most toxic material known to mankind sits in the fuel pool. And that’s really what Bernie Sanders and Patrick Leahy were saying – and others – Ed Markey from Massachusetts and a few others as well – are saying this is wrong; if you’re going to have the most toxic material known to mankind, you need an emergency plan until it’s no longer on the site.

MH:    But they are – Entergy is just forging ahead with their decommissioning plan. Do they have a decommissioning plan?

AG:     They haven’t published their final plan. And they have until the end of 2015. They have a year after shutdown to publish the final plan. But they have said that within a year after shutdown, they’re going to eliminate all of the emergency planning staff. And to me, that’s frightening. And I’m glad to Vermont Senators that’s frightening. And it’s not just Vermont. There’s a plant that shut down in Wisconsin, the same thing. There’s two plants that are shut down in California – the same thing. So the industry is putting enormous pressure on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to eliminate emergency planning. But to me, it just makes no sense whatsoever.

MH:    And again, going back to the title of our program, “Nuclear Industry: Profit Before Public Safety,” – this is – the common denominator is the money that’s involved with this sort of safety measure.

AG:     Well, both those things are money – the emergency planning, they want to reduce their cost, and Price Andersen Insurance, they’re not paying anything now. So yeah – and the complicit regulator at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission allows that to happen. Effectively, we’re subsidizing nuclear power by eliminating emergency planning and by paying for their insurance even though one would think with 70 years of actuarial basis, they could get an insurance company to step up.

MH:    And this is unprecedented, as you say, with 10 nuclear power plants that will be decommissioned, that they will be on their own then.

AG:     There’s five. Five plants have shut down in the last year – two at San Onofre, one at Kewanee in Wisconsin, one down in Florida, Crystal River; and of course, Vermont Yankee is within a couple months of shutting down permanently. And the industry never had to face that before. (10:33) A lot of times a plant is shut down, like Millstone 1 in Connecticut or Dresden 1 in Illinois. But there are still two other operating reactors on those sites. What’s happened in the last year, though, is each one of these entire sites has shut down. So they can’t rely on the emergency plan for the other reactor and the NRC is just rolling over and allowing it to happen.

MH:    Arnie, could you tell us what the prospect is if the decommissioning goes ahead without the emergency response and security measures? What can we see happening down there at Vermont Yankee? That they will have 60 years of a fuel pool that is going to be kept there? Take us from there.

AG:     Well, when the reactor shuts down, there’ll be 35 years of nuclear fuel in the nuclear fuel pool – 35, 37 years. Within 5 years, they have to empty the nuclear fuel pool. So the most dangerous time in a nuclear decommissioning is the first 5 or 7 years. Vermont Yankee actually made it worse, and so did San Onofre out in California, because they went to high burn-up fuel. They ran the fuel in the nuclear reactor longer. And that makes it hotter after it shuts down, which means it has to stay in the pool longer. So they got the benefit of the burning the fuel longer, but we got the risk of sitting with that nuclear fuel in the pool. Well, after about 5 or 7 years, the pool is empty and in dry casks. And those of us in the nuclear industry think that’s the best thing to do is to get the fuel into dry casks. Fukushima had dry casks and they survived the tsunami and the earthquake just fine. A dry cask is passive. It doesn’t have pumps and water to cool with. And it’s perfectly – it is a perfectly doable thing. There’s no technological reasons why it can’t be done. So the risk years are the first 5 or 7 years when there’s fuel in the fuel pool.

MH:    And that is what Entergy and the other nuclear power plants are proposing to have without insurance or the taxpayer paying the insurance and without the safety measures, during those crucial years.

AG:     They want us to continue to insure them because there is a risk, and yet they want us to not have an emergency plan because there is no risk. And you can’t have it both ways. If you want to eliminate the emergency plan, then it’s time to pay for your own insurance.

MH:    It’s mind boggling that this should be going forward, and as you say, it is good that the senators have stepped forward. And the other Senator was Senator Gillibrand from New York who signed this letter to the head of the NRC. But besides the crucial 5 to 7 years, what other emergency plans are going to go by the wayside?

AG:     After the fuel is out of the fuel pool, there will still be radioactivity in the plant. And an example would be like the Hanford Reservation out in Washington has highly radioactive buildings but the fuel is no longer there. And at that point, the issues are rodent related and infestation related. At Hanford, rabbits are getting into these old buildings and eating the wires and then becoming radioactive themselves. And then the rabbits leave and you’ve got radioactive rabbit droppings all through the woods that they pick up on helicopters and they pay people to go out and kill the rabbits. They pay them $75 an hour – it’s good money. They call it bunny money. They go out and they shoot these radioactive rabbits. The other issue is radioactive wasps. Wasps fly into the building, use the moisture to build nests in the forests nearby. So now you’re getting radioactive transportation from inside the reactor buildings out into the forest. Same with birds. Radioactive birds nests and things like that. So the sooner you can knock a plant down after you moved the fuel, the better off you are. You can do this in 10 years. The carcass only has to sit for about 10 years before it could be completely dismantled, decommissioned and turned back into a farmer’s field.

MH:    Into green fields.

AG:     Yeah. We call it green fields. The site at Vermont Yankee was a farmer’s field, and it could be, within 10 years, reused for that application. There’s a site in Illinois at the Zion Reactor that is a beautiful site and they want to build high rise apartments on it. So the land has value after the plant has decommissioned. So there’s no scientific reason why we should need to wait 60 years to decommission a power plant. Nothing in science says 60 years is a magic number. But again, it’s one of these hidden subsidies. If the owner of the plant doesn’t have to put much money up to decommission it, and he’s allowed to wait 60 years while the stock market grows that money, it artificially lowers the cost of nuclear power. Now here in Vermont, we’ve got the windmills on the ridge lines. To build a windmill, you have to have a completely paid for decommissioning fund before you ever start the windmill turning. Yet if you’re Vermont Yankee, you don’t have to have a fully paid for decommissioning fund for 60 years after it’s shut down. So this plant was built 40 years ago; so essentially, for 100 years, you don’t have to have all the money to dismantle a plant for nuclear, but for a windmill, you have to have it before it begins to generate a single kilowatt.

MH:    Well, with Entergy and the 60 years, their plan is to – I’m referring to a letter here from Andrew Larkin and Anneke Corbett in the Gazette.com. And they criticize SafStor – S-a-f-s-t-o-r – and they say that “SafStor puts dealing with the reactor into the future for up to 60 years. Now there are workers who are familiar with the functioning of the reactors. Sixty years from now, the experienced workforce will be dead. Entergy’s plan to invest the current $620 million decommissioning fund into an unspecified financial project so that at some far time in the future there is enough money in the future for decommissioning.”

AG:     What the NRC allows you to do – and I’ll try to do this backward for the audience to see it correctly – there is right now about $600 million in the decommissioning fund. And you hope that it grows in the stock market. The NRC says it’s going to grow at 5 percent a year. So the growth in the decommissioning fund is like that. (17:55) The cost to dismantle Vermont Yankee is a billion dollars. And the Nuclear Regulatory Commissioners say costs are going to grow at 3 percent. In fact, they’ve grown past that, but the NRC says 3 percent. So 600 billion growing at 5 percent and a billion growing at 3 percent, sooner or later, those lines cross. And as long as they cross in a shorter period of time than 60 years, the NRC is happy. I’m not happy about that. That’s a hidden subsidy to nuclear power that windmills don’t have.

MH:    So in effect, we’re waiting for their 60-year profit.

AG:     Right. We’re waiting for the stock market to have perpetual 5 percent gains in growth. And of course, what happened in 2008, 2009 shows that that didn’t happen. The other example is the crash of 1929. It was 1954 – 30 years later, before the stock market ever got back to where it was. So this belief – this unfounded belief that the stock market’s going to grow 5 percent every year and costs are going to grow at 3 percent every year, is a myth. But it’s a myth that subsidizes nuclear power and makes it appear cheaper than it really is.

MH:    And in the meantime during that 60 years, who is maintaining the dry casks that are remaining there?

AG:     Yeah, there has to be a guard force. There has to be lights, there has to be fences with razor wire, and there have to be people measuring the radiation. We call those people health physics people. So they’re spending about 5 million dollars a year on the guards and the measuring people and the lights to guard that nuclear fuel once it’s in the dry casks. And that comes out of the decommissioning fund as Entergy is proposing it. I don’t think that’s fair, either. But Entergy is stripping the decommissioning fund to pay for dry cask storage.

MH:    And Arnie, remind us where the decommissioning fund money comes from.

AG:     Well, here in Vermont, the people of Vermont gave about $10 million a year from 1970 until 2000. So we contributed $300 million into our electric rates so that when the plant shut down, there’d be enough money to dismantle it. So we were contributing $10 million a year. When Entergy took over the plant, they took that $300 million and didn’t add another penny to it. And they said well, we’re going to invest it in the stock market and 60 years from now, there’ll be enough money. Trust us; don’t worry. Then they also formed something they called a limited liability corporation, which I also think Larkin and Corbett talk about. These plants have no assets. It’s not like Entergy is ensuring that this plant will be decommissioned. Vermont Yankee is its own limited liability corporation. So is Indian Point 2, a limited liability corporation – Pilgrim. Each one is their own stand-alone limited liability corporation. And what that allows them to do is to walk away from the debt rather than pay it.

MH:    (21:32) If they walked away from the debt, what would happen?

AG:     You know, if a gas station goes belly up, it ultimately falls on the state to clean it up – a superfund site. If there’s an asbestos problem. Here’s an example. In Moab, Utah, there was a uranium tailings mine. Uranium tailings are the stuff that comes out of the ground and they strip out a lot of uranium – don’t get it all – and the remaining dirt is radioactive. So that’s a tailings mine. And the NRC told the owner, you need $6 million in decommissioning fund. And the owner got $6 million. Well, the cleanup is going to be a billion dollars. So there’s $994 million worth of unfunded money there. You and I are paying for it. So there’s another billion dollar subsidy to nuclear power, just at Moab, Utah site. And it’s happened around the country. In Pennsylvania, there’s a site that went bankrupt and there wasn’t enough money in the decommissioning fund. So bankruptcy gets you out of that debt and then you and I have to pay to have it cleaned up – taxpayers.

MH:    And what is the prospect of ever cleaning up Vermont Yankee so as you said, it could return to green fields? That is the dream and the hope of people.

AG:     I ran a group that dismantled, decommissioned nuclear facilities. And it can be done. It’s not a high tech proposition. The radioactive material gets shipped to Texas where it’s stored in West Texas, which is a very arid area with very low income people that wanted the jobs and weren’t concerned about the radioactive dangers. But the radioactivity leaves Vermont, which is good for Vermont, and we get a green field back. That process could take 10 years but in fact, it looks like Entergy will drag that out to 50 or 60 years. Ultimately, all the radioactive material from the power plant itself – the radioactive pipes, the nuclear reactor, the building – all that will get shipped to Texas. And the nuclear fuel may sit in Vernon on a pad near the Connecticut River for as long as a hundred or 200 years until we have a place to store it underground.

MH:    And if Entergy has their way, there will be no emergency and security measures in place.

AG:     There will be no emergency measures. There will be a guard force around the nuclear fuel. But there won’t be – if the nuclear fuel were to leak or there was a terrorist attack on the nuclear fuel, there would be no emergency response people to evacuate large portions of southern Vermont. Yeah, it’s a mess.

MH:    It is a mess. And again, it seems that we’ve been at this for 70 years and these particular nuclear reactors that are being decommissioned are 40 years old. And so even with all of that time, we still don’t know the right way forward.

AG:     When I was in Japan – it’s very hard to engage the Japanese audience because they’re very placid. You don’t get any facial recognition that you’re making a point. And on top of that, I had a translator. But they understood one thing. I said that nuclear has been subsidized for 70 years. We started subsidizing nuclear power in the 40’s. And every time a new design comes along, the power companies don’t pay for that. The Department of Energy pays to have that new design developed. So again and again and again, taxpayers have subsidized nuclear power. (25:40) So I said to the Japanese audience, when your kids are 20 years old and they come home, it’s okay if you subsidize them and give them their room back. And if your kids are 30 and they run into bad times, it’s okay if they come back to mom and dad and you give them their room back. And if it was really hard times, maybe when they hit 40 you’d say okay, mom and dad are here, we’ll subsidize you. But when your kid hits 70 years old, it’s time to say no. There’s no more subsidies. You are on your own. Fish or cut bait. And that never happens with nuclear power. The Japanese audience, which is very much into taking care of their ancestors, appreciated that we’re in a situation here where the ancestors are taking care of the children, which is the wrong way that this should be done.

MH:    And what about the small modular reactors? Are they being built now? Is this a plan on the horizon?

AG:     Well, there’s always a new thing in nuclear power. At the beginning of the nuclear renaissance, there were going to be large reactors. And nobody bought any large reactors. So the nuclear industry said, well, we’ll build small reactors called small modular reactors – SMR. And they claimed that they would build an assembly line here in the United States. That’s not going to happen. It will be made in China or something like that. But the theory was, we could build these ourselves, just like building cars or something like that. But the small modular reactor assembly line is going to cost $100 billion. And there’s no company in its right mind that is going to spend $100 billion on an assembly line to build small nuclear reactors. So again, that’s another potential subsidy coming down the road. No one is buying small modular reactors and there’s no investor interested in small modular reactors. But the Department of Energy continues to spend money on the design. It’s the next buzzword in nuclear technology. It’s the next subsidized gimmick.

MH:    And that’s called research and development and it is paid for by taxpayers’ money.

AG:     Yes. You know, years ago the Nuclear Regulatory Commission had a charter of regulating and promoting. At that time it was called the AEC – Atomic Energy Commission. And they broke it up and they created the NRC, which was supposed to regulate. It really doesn’t; it promotes. But then they gave the promotional part to the Department of Energy. And the Department of Energy is the biggest cheerleader for nuclear power in the world. The Department of Energy is actually funding breeder reactors in Japan. The Japanese don’t want them. The Japanese can’t afford them. But American taxpayer money is being spent on breeder reactors in Japan through the Department of Energy as part of this overall strategy of subsidizing nuclear power.

MH:    It’s an endless story.

AG:     Yes.

MH:    And do you see any kind of glimmer of hope besides the efforts of our legislators here? This is a good step forward to wake people up.

AG:     Well, hats off to Bernie Sanders, who has always been on this bandwagon, and to Patrick Leahy, for his efforts to make sure we have emergency planning. Ed Markey is another one, in Massachusetts, who’s always seen how heavily subsidized nuclear power is. But the nuclear lobby is extensive in Washington. And almost every senator and congressman is influenced by the lobbyists. So if we take the lobbyists out of this, nuclear power will have to fend for itself. But that’s not the Washington way. Peter Bradford, Vermont’s own resident former Nuclear Regulatory Commissioner, said in Washington, there are no democrats and republicans on nuclear power. They are all pro nuclear. There’s no political divide on nuclear power in Washington. Every single congressman lines up to support nuclear power. And that has a direct effect on who’s appointed to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Every single commissioner has been approved by the Congress. And Congress doesn’t approve them until the nuclear industry signs off. So we essentially have five commissioners who are approved by industry who are now changing hats and overseeing industry. And we all know that doesn’t happen.

MH:    Thank you, Arnie, for again enlightening us on what’s going on and keeping us aware and – raising our awareness very much. So I hope that you can come back again to continue this conversation and I hope that the legislators’ letter to the NRC Commissioner gets some attention.

AG:     Well, I hope so, too. Thank you for having me.

MH:    Thank you, Arnie. And thank you, viewers. Goodbye until next time.

****************

TLB recommends you visit FAIREWINDS for more pertinent articles, videos and information.

See featured article here.

 

GMOsMIX-460

 

 by: David Gutierrez

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s recent approval of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) resistant to new herbicides will soon unleash a flood of new toxic chemicals across the nation’s agricultural heartland, observers have warned.

Previously, nearly all GMO crops approved for planting were engineered for resistance to a single herbicide: Monsanto’s blockbuster product Roundup (glyphosate). The widespread adoption of these crops led to an explosion in Roundup use, which in turn spurred the evolution of Roundup resistance in agricultural weeds.

In response to the proliferation of Roundup-resistant “superweeds,” GMO companies have turned to engineering multi-herbicide resistance into their crops. Specifically, GMO crops are now available resistant to both Roundup and the Dow herbicide 2,4-D, or Roundup and another herbicide, Dicamba.

But as critics of biotechnology have repeatedly noted, the adoption of these new GMOs will merely exacerbate the problem – encouraging still more herbicide use and the evolution of ever-tougher superweeds. In a recent article, Dr. Jonathan Latham of the Bioscience Resource Project referred to the process as “a vicious cycle that threatens both our environment and our food supply.”

Poisonous to plants and people

The adoption of herbicide-resistant GMOs always leads to an increase in herbicide use, because farmers feel free to spray poison in higher concentrations to kill off more weeds, no longer worried about harming their crop. As weeds start to develop resistance (within a few generations), the herbicide doses needed to kill them begin to increase. Inevitably, residue from these herbicides makes its way into the food supply.

Unsurprisingly, chemicals designed to poison plants are not benign for animals, either. Roundup has been linked with endocrine disruption, birth defects and organ failure. An ingredient in the infamous Vietnam War-era defoliant Agent Orange – 2,4-D – has been linked with hypothyroidism, Parkinson’s disease, reproductive problems and suppressed immune function. The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer has declared both chemicals “probable carcinogens.”

According to government documents, Dicamba can cause neurological damage in mammals and is also classified as a “developmental toxin.” This latter effect is particularly troubling given that a recent Environmental Working Group report counted more than 5,600 schools within 200 feet of agricultural fields likely to be planted with the new GMO crops.

Both Dicamba and 2,4-D are considered at high risk for environmental contamination, the former in the soil and the latter by drifting through the air.

Government protects industry, not health

People hoping that government regulatory agencies will step in and protect the public from this chemical violence are likely to be disappointed. Rather than taking measures to prevent the predicted explosion of 2,4-D use near schools throughout the Midwest, Congress is currently working hard to pass the DARK (Deny Americans the Right to Know) Act, which would ban GMO labeling initiatives and potentially even prevent state or local governments from regulating herbicide use on GMO crops.

And while the White House recently ordered a multi-agency update of the rules governing GMOs in the United States, the priorities of that review are made clear by a single sentence from the memorandum: “The objectives are to ensure public confidence in the regulatory system and to prevent unnecessary barriers to future innovation and competitiveness by improving the transparency, coordination, predictability, and efficiency of the regulation of biotechnology products while continuing to protect health and the environment.”

That is, the first priority is to make sure that people trust the government, specifically its GMO regulations (or lack thereof). The second priority is to protect the profits of the biotech industry by preventing “barriers to future innovation and competitiveness.”

Only at the end is there a mention of protecting health or the environment – with a presumption that these are already being protected.

Given the already astonishing rates of Roundup use nationwide, that presumption is certainly open to question.

Sources:

http://www.anh-usa.org

http://www.naturalnews.com/050396_Dow_herbicide_GMOs_cancer.html

http://www.naturalnews.com

http://www.naturalnews.com

www.organicconsumers.org

http://www.naturalnews.com

http://www.toxipedia.org/display/toxipedia/Dicamba

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/050830_chemical_violence_GMOs_glyphosate.html#ixzz3jTJcSeoR

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

See featured article here

TLB recommends you visit Natural News for more great/pertinent articles.




  • Subscribe to Blog via Email

    Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 869 other subscribers