Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THE PUBLIC IS being urged to stay away from areas affected by sea fog.
The Coast Guard alert comes after three girls were rescued from Sandymount Beach last night.
The girls had become disorientated when a heavy fog rolled in. They were cut off by the incoming tide and surrounded by water. There was very little visibility and temperatures were dropping, according to the RNLI.
A woman was also taken to hospital after she fell on rocks at Bullock Harbour near Dalkey.
Sea fog is forecast all along the east coast today and the RNLI’s Mark McGibney says that last night’s incident could have been serious.
“If they had walked in the wrong direction they could have quickly become out of their depth, instead they made the right decision and called for help. In this case thankfully it ended well.”
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Meanwhile life goes on at Fukushima.
Only a matter of time when we will rue the day of nuclear power
I think the people of Pripyat already do.
Someday they will learn to handle it properly and safely…
“Someday they will learn to handle it properly and safely” — but what will the consequences be,
when they learn that?
It’s no trick being safer than coal. But what if it becomes safer than natural gas to provide the same power? Safer than natural-gas-plus-wind-turbines? It’s already less radioactively polluting than those systems.
When that superior safety shall be fact, a government that wants to take a billion dollars in natural gas severance taxes and/or royalties and/or import duties will have to accept the loss of some citizens to gas disasters in the bargain. If it allows nuclear energy to be used instead, those lives will be saved, but the billion will, from a civil service point of view, be lost: it will remain in private hands.
No-one will forthrightly deplore that result. Everyone’s official position will be that however good a few million dollars in tax revenue may be, it doesn’t justify an innocent citizen’s death.
But perhaps there will come to be a huge industry of denying that nuclear energy is a lifesaver, and of calling nuclear wrecks that harm no-one “nuclear disasters”.
Perhaps, eh?
Perhaps when the media makes accuracy the priority over profits.. but the scary word “nuclear” sells very well. The headline “Radiation from Fukushima has not caused any health effect” may be true, but it won’t catch peoples attention or sell advertising. They definitely don’t want people to know that fear of Fukushima radiation caused much more harm than the radiation itself, then they might be held accountable…….
Not a single person was killed when the water hit the Fukushima nuclear plant, in fact I have not heard of anyone even cutting their finger there. In comparison around 18,000 people from the surrounding area were swept away never to be seen again. But here on the Journal Fukushima is remembered as a a nuclear disaster. In the press hysteria trumps fact every time.
The tsunami left the enormous death toll,19000, not the incident at the nuclear power plant. The wording of this item is rubbish.
have your say