Of course the death of sea life rising so substantially on the California coast is blamed on global warming–but not Fukushima, nuclear disasters are bad for GE and why let a good crisis go to waste? Particularly so when it can be transformed to support the lies and machinations of the State. It is not climate change we need to be worrying about, it is the tyranny of the State–the greatest threat to the environment, for both humans and nature.
U.S. Navy sailors exposed to radioactive fallout from the Fukushima nuclear disaster have been falling ill, even as the Defense Department insists that they were not exposed to dangerous levels of radiation. Many of the sailors have now joined in a class action lawsuit against Fukushima operators and builders Tokyo Electric Power Company (Tepco), Toshiba, Hitachi, Ebasco and General Electric.
Even if they wanted to — which many do not — the sailors would be unable to sue the Navy. According to a Supreme Court ruling from the 1950s known as the Feres Doctrine, soldiers cannot sue the government for injuries resulting directly from their military service.
Doctor “removed 6 thyroids in recent months” from USS Reagan crew exposed to Fukushima fallout — “Over 500 sailors ill after mission in Japan” — Officer: “There’s sick soldiers everywhere, many in hospitals in San Diego or Hawaii… I don’t know what’s going on” — Veteran in wheelchair thrown out by physician, “You’re faking, you need to leave”
Steve Simmons was honorably discharged from the Navy for medical reasons last June. His complaints began about a year after he returned from Japan when his muscles began to fail and his hair began falling out by the handful. Four years ago, he competed in triathlons and hiked in the mountains. Now, he can no longer walk — and nobody can tell him why.
SEATTLE – Lawmakers are pushing proposals that advance nuclear power as part of Washington’s energy mix.
Bills sponsored by Republican Sen. Sharon Brown of Kennewick promotes nuclear energy, focusing on small nuclear reactors that are designed to be built in factories, trucked to a site and assembled on location.
The Senate Ways and Means Committee heard one bill on Tuesday that calls for a state study that would identify possible locations for these smaller reactors.
Supporters say they have lower upfront building costs and more flexibility where they can be located. They can be more efficient and cost-effective.
Critics, however, say the reactors are still unproven because none have been built yet, and questions remain about whether they’re safer or more affordable.
Law360, New York (February 12, 2015, 6:51 PM ET) — General Electric Co. on Wednesday asked a California federal judge to toss a lawsuit accusing it of designing faulty nuclear reactors that were damaged in a 2011 tsunami that hit Japan, arguing the U.S. sailors who were allegedly injured during the response can’t bring their $1 billion suit in this country.
GE said the plaintiffs are asking the court to “do something extraordinary and unprecedented” — award damages under domestic law for alleged exposure to radiation emitted by a foreign nuclear power plant that was owned and operated by a foreign company and certified and regulated by a foreign government.
“This is a Japanese power plant that was owned and operated by a Japanese company, defendant Tokyo Electric Power Co., and that the Japanese government certified and closely regulated,” GE said in a motion to dismiss the lawsuit.
The group of U.S. Navy rescue personnel filed a $1 billion putative class actionagainst Tokyo Electric Power Co. Inc. in Californian federal court in February 2014, claiming the utility failed to disclose that they would be exposed to nuclear radiation during a humanitarian mission aiding tsunami victims. In an amended complaint, the sailors allege that GE also is liable on the theory that it defectively designed and manufactured the Fukushima-Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant’s reactors more than 40 years ago.
According to GE, the Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage confers exclusive jurisdiction on the courts of Japan for claims arising from a nuclear incident in Japan. On that basis alone, the company said the suit should be dismissed.