<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:s="http://www.bnet.com/search" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"  xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
    <title><![CDATA[Discussion on The nuclear situation in Japan is getting worse, experts worry about other plants in seismic zones ]]></title>
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565]]></link>
    <atom:link rel="hub" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" />
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565/rss" />

    <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>2013-06-18T23:03:59-07:00</lastBuildDate>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Dirty Science]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-45446]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Atomic energy,1,three mile Island.2 Russian melt down,3 Japan reactors,and now two more in Nebraska.Gee,is melt downs a  common occurence,I better watch Japans melt through,thats new right.Radioactive steam straight up in the air and ocean leaks,Just love how we are being warned by our Goverments and GEs Media.They dont want to be wrong about neclear power,so shovel it too us.I need fertilizer.Listen to the experts squirm twist and bull **** us,to death! PS there is no way to stop a Melt though.you will see.Experts are a dime a dozen,when over paid.They wont cut there own throat!Pay any one,he will say what you want,or be jobless!]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-45446]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[saynotoatom]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 25 Jun 2011 09:26:45 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Truth as I see it?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-45439]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Fukushumia is two nuclear plants with the same name 10 reactors.Each reactor has 6 spent fuel ponds on the roof,plus one big bastard at ground level.one fuel rod weights 2,500 pounds.over the years spent fuel rods are stored on site.there 12 feet long and half a inch thick.There is  spent fuel rods on the roofs of each melted down reactor.The third explosion you can see the fuel rods in the air that must be covered in water to pervent Fire.obvious to viewers,watching the world going to high radition living,No mention of insects,birds,fish,plants,or anything that means something,like the Pacific Algea plume,radioactive this year,fish feed,your at the top of the food chain.or were?To some up,repercussion down the road are there,Im a old man,I dont want to boil water with poison,or change my kids DNA to look like Jelly fish.Or swallow U-235 or JP8 jet fuel:.GE brings good things to life;LOL LOL Death to every living thing?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-45439]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[saynotoatom]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 25 Jun 2011 08:30:42 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Does Dry Cask storage float in Nebraska;there being flooded.]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-45456]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[NO. Nuclear power is poison reason ,spent fuel ponds melt down,out of the reactors.The Dry storage is still being cooled by air.LOL and is poisoning all the river  people use.Oboma has a news black-out from his friends at GE.and you people bla bla bla.Think,water in Dry Cask Storage water out with spent fuel rod wash.TO hell with the reactors the Fuel Pond storage is melted,and there using the river too cool the spent fuel ponds.the bastards are allowing the flood to cool the ponds! Remmember how they lie all the time in the past.No different.You get sick they make money on the illness they give you.General Eletric is making a killing,you poor souls Oboma GE,greed,power over the masses Oboma has a fallout shelter do you?Build all the reactors where they can do the most Damage,flood plains,any place! Gee we didnt know ,so sorry?Well you got change.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-45456]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[saynotoatom]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 25 Jun 2011 07:30:31 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[That's one heck of a bottleneck, John.]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-38180]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[#34,So on the one hand, you want unlimited energy for all, and if you get that, then somehow if this happens, then our global population drops from 7 going on 9 billion folks to....3 billion?  I know that in industrialized nations, growth rates have dropped to below replacement values, but do you have any idea how much consumption would take place if everyone on the planet raised their energy consumption to US standards in order to get there? You're talking about a serious bottleneck, John, and here's why:What we do with our energy in the US is &quot;stuff.&quot; You know, build houses, buy and operate cars, have jobs, raise and feed families, and the rest, right? On a very, very coarse level, all of that &quot;stuff&quot; leads to more than consumption of energy, it leads to consumption of materials, right? You know, the stuff that houses, cars, food et. al are made of. The US Geological Survey thinks in this very coarse way, and if you go to this site:http://maps.grida.no/go/graphic/raw_material_consumption_global_trends_and_us_shareyou'll see that the US consumes around 3 billion tons of stuff in a year, as compared to 10.25 billion for the rest of the planet. There are 7 billion consuming folks wandering around the planet, but only around 320 million of them live in the US, or about 4.5% of the total number. Now the thing is that if everyone was consuming the same amount of energy we consume per capita, chances are that they'll be doing &quot;stuff&quot; with that energy. And if that &quot;stuff&quot; consumed the same amount of raw material at the same rate as we do per Joule consumed, then we're talking about 7 billion folks consuming 66 billion tons of stuff per year, if I used the calculator on my phone correctly.How can this be possible? Clearly it cannot be, as we are already bumping against serious shortages of a wide variety of raw and processed materials. Increase that amount almost 7 times, and you've basically churned up the entire earth's crust in short order, let alone done irreparable damage to the living biosphere. Hence the nature of the shrinking bottleneck.Now the planet would be able to recycle much of our consumption in its geological and biological elemental cycling and sinks, but to funnel that much of the earth/biosphere through our activities is clearly untenable. We clearly need to learn how to live more sustainably within the existing biogeochemical cycling of our planet, or face major disruptions of those cycles, which will threaten our own sustainability as a species.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-38180]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[klassman6]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sun, 20 Mar 2011 05:53:13 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[RE: The nuclear situation in Japan is getting worse, experts worry about other plants in seismic zones]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-38175]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I'd also like to add my thought on energy usage.Many complain that the industrialized nations (especially the U.S.) use too much energy.I strongly disagree.I fully believe the problem is that too many people don't use enough - because it's not available to them.Modern living, lifestyles, health care, production of wealth, longer lives, lifting the billions of poor out of poverty requires they all have more energy to work and advance with.I don't want to live with less. I want EVERYONE to live with what  I have.Turning back is NOT the answer. Moving ALL people forward is.I must also say that a world population of about 3 billion is a goal we have to go for. My wife and I had no children. We chose to adopt. So we not only didn't &quot;just&quot; replace ourselves - we didn't even replace one of us.Advanced living for all will help reduce world population as the old agricultural need for large families goes away.Let's get clean energy for EVERYONE in very generous amounts and all live a better life.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-38175]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[John T. Hill III]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 19 Mar 2011 18:29:53 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[RE: The nuclear situation in Japan is getting worse, experts worry about other plants in seismic zones]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-38174]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[The complete situation in Japan is terrible. The great loss of life and the suffering of so many thousands is heartbreaking.I think the people so affected should be our first concern.Not ALL energy has a downside. Think of lightning farming. The total number of strikes and the emmense power in each of those strikes is astounding. And this occurs thousands of times a day 24/7/365. The amount of power in lighting strikes is huge. Multiply that by thousands of strikes a day and you have what, practically speaking, amounts to a never ending, always on, 100% free source of non-poluting energy that just might require no storage capability.Connect all the grids worldwide into one massive grid.Put up many radio/tv type towers with lightning rods and pump the electricity straight into the grid. Send the excess to ground to protect the grid. Rectify the power to the desired voltage and frequency at the final place of use. Send any excess there to ground.Further good news is that lightning strikes of great numbers occur in relatively small areas of the earth's surface (all around the world) meaning the farms can easily be located for maximum efficiency.Lightning power isn't going away and unless you get struck by it, it's harmless.And if we must use nuclear energy, I agree, let's build no more of the same reactors we've used for so long but start building the modern designs that REALLY can be &quot;turned off&quot;.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-38174]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[John T. Hill III]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 19 Mar 2011 18:14:36 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Nuclear Situation]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-38065]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I have been raising this issue for years... Now they are talking about Diablo and Onofre... They are 'Registered' facilities there are more than just two in California. There are also 'Test' facilities and 'Decomissioned' facilities. Pricipally one where the Adreas fault runs back into the ocean near Fields Landing just south of Eureka. This plant was decomissioned in the early '70s due to cracks found in the slough ways for the cooling system. If you drive by it today; you will see that it is still hot.Our forefathers had a great idea but just forgotten a few things, trusting the future generations to follow up on. Unfortunately, these things had gotten swept under a rug and now it is time to 'Face-Up'. One of the items are that under ideal conditions of pouring concrete; the max live is approx 130 years. With radiation involved, the life is shortened. Someone will have to come up with a way to replace the mud. Protective berms around the area to deflect said particles were not constructed due to cost efficientcies (lowest bidder). Also the thinking at that time was that if there was a 'melt-down' was that the core would simply drop down into the fault with the seawater following to create it's own mud to cap off the fire.So, It is time for us to pick the brains of our 'Elder' scientists and engineers that actually understand Physics and maybe we can come up with a more longterm solution.  KC]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-38065]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[K.G. Campbell II]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2011 09:29:10 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[RE: The nuclear situation in Japan is getting worse, experts worry about other plants in seismic zones]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-38032]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[@riverat1And I live less than 35 miles from San Onofre . But as  my friend Alfred E. Newman always  says &quot;What, me worry?&quot;]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-38032]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Me_too]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2011 21:12:19 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[RE: The nuclear situation in Japan is getting worse, experts worry about other plants in seismic zones]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-38031]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[@bb_apptix #17 - There's a very good reason for building &quot;on the beach&quot; - it's a single pump's distance to the world's largest heat sink. That's not to say that natural phenomena like this shouldn't be taken into account, but economics *must* have a role in energy production.@Tamalaine #20 - I worked my way through college at a nuclear plant. One of the projects I worked on was reviewing the design bases and ensuring they were still being met. One of these was that the containment building should be able to withstand the force of a fully-loaded DC-10 (the largest commercial airliner when it was designed) directly striking the containment dome.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-38031]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[kylehutson]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2011 14:56:33 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Defining off.]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-37963]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[If a nuclear reactor still requires 10,000 gallons of water an hour to keep cool even months after it stops generating power than the design is inherently unsafe.I would not consider it truly disaster resistant unless it goes cold in under 48 hours and requires no external power to maintain a safe temperature.If a safe temperature is 300 degrees F than the system had better have adequate natural circulation cooling to capture boil off and allow the liquid to return to the reactor.The designs are top secret, but it is commonly assumed that the reactors in US Navy subs have such a safe loop mode that minimizes the use of circulating pumps for slow speed silent running.  Being completely submerged simplifies access to cooling water, but the basic designs already exist.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-37963]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Hates Idiots]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2011 07:24:03 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[RE: The nuclear situation in Japan is getting worse, experts worry about other plants in seismic zones]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-37942]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I read somewhere that 20% of all the people who ever lived are alive today. This is the biggest problem on the earth.To me at least it does not make sense to improve life expectancy without reducing fertility rate. I for one fully support China'a one child policy. What we need today is negative population growth rate if we are going to limit energy consumption to sustainable levels. But then as Gandhi said there is enough for everyone's need but not enough for even one man's greed. Are the pharma and oil companies listening?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-37942]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[pmshah@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2011 00:12:57 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[RE: The nuclear situation in Japan is getting worse, experts worry about other plants in seismic zones]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-37952]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[@Johno413@ When tens of thousands are dead or injured from the sequence of natural events themselves, to focus so intent and prematurely on the nuclear power is practically maudlin.Wiktionary defines 'maudlin' as Extravagantly or excessively sentimental; self-pitying.Which definition are you referring to?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-37952]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Me_too]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2011 20:35:56 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[RE: The nuclear situation in Japan is getting worse, experts worry about other plants in seismic zones]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-37938]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I'm not going to comment on the situation itself except to say that I have a minimal background in risk management and sometimes either you don't foresee all the risks, or place the likelihood of them at such a low level it becomes acceptable, even if the result of that risk actually occurring could be catastrophic. The fact that the plant has been in operation for over 40 years speaks to that.My main thought though is how impressed I am (generally) with the intelligent and constructive comments here on both sides of the issue. Very few trolls, emotional outbursts, etc. Well done.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-37938]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[zhuatclfk]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2011 20:20:38 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[RE: The nuclear situation in Japan is getting worse, experts worry about other plants in seismic zones]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-37920]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[wizoddg,and how many inches will the oceans rise in the next 100 years???HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAPoor models do not an emergency make.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-37920]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[KuhnKat]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2011 18:13:10 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Tip of the iceberg....]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-37936]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Those nuclear plants not located on or near fault lines are located mostly in low-lying coastal areas.The single trend in climate change data is that scientists are being It is not safe for us to assume that major sea level rises will take decades.On some risks it's o.k. to respond after-the-fact (which Americans excel at,) but climate change and nuclear risks are poor choices for that particular tack to work.I'd rather we move cities and facilities and harden them for extremes now instead of evacuating and recovering from devastation later.The Equatorial bulge of this planet has reversed direction in recent years, which means that stresses around the planet have shifted significantly. Such a shift is nearly certain to increase tectonic plate movements. When combined with tera-tonnes of melt water--which will tend to flow to the equator adding their mass to the stress, betting that places like New Orleans or Holland have decades to prepare is asking for disaster.Being prepared for a disaster which comes late or never is infinitely better than being unprepared when disaster strikes.We have millions of people out of work who could be working to prepare or working to clean up pollution--100's of billions of dollars worth of unused labor.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-37936]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[wizoddg]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2011 17:25:03 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[RE: The nuclear situation in Japan is getting worse, experts worry about other plants in seismic zones]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-37918]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[&quot;What happened in Japan ?is clearly an indication that we haven?t properly thought about events that are well outside our historical experience but nonetheless possible.&quot;Actually not...The problem is *NOT* that the powerplants haven't been thought out well enough...the problem is that the plants were designed with the flaws built in! The flaws that we are seeing in Japan were discussed ad-nauseum back in the 70s when they were designed. There even was a lawsuit in the works because the plants were built despite the flaws! Everything that is happening was predicted to happen back in 1972!http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/16/world/asia/16contain.html?_r=1&amp;ref=asiaAnd this is the shame of all this...The world knew that this would happen and yet nobody felt it would happen to them!@sboverie@...&quot;The design of the Japanese reactors was probably considered to be excellent before the earthquake.&quot;That's the problem...the design was *NOT* considered excellent...they were considered &quot;good enough&quot;...obviously, the design was *NOT* good enough!@danny.sloop@..&quot;These vintage ?70 and ?80 plants could use some overhaul and replacement.&quot;We *DID* redesign the plants, but that was just to install vents to prevent dangerous buildup of Hydrogen gas inside the containment vessel! Kinda defeats the purpose of a containment vessel, right?Look, we *CAN* build a nuclear power station that is safe and efficient...we just have to get politics out of it! These breeder reactors designed by GE were done because they won the lowest bid! Do *YOU* want a nuclear reactor in your backyard designed and built with the cheapest labor and materials? Not me! But it seems that every time government pokes it's head in some large construction endeavor, it fails miserably! Look at the &quot;Big Dig&quot; in Boston! What a fiasco that is! And it's killing people as we speak! hundred ton cement slabs are falling from the ceiling and crushing drivers below!]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-37918]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[tech_ed@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2011 16:03:44 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[RE: The nuclear situation in Japan is getting worse, experts worry about other plants in seismic zones]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-37885]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Everything is a trade off oil and coal are poisons and the burning is filthy. Every form of energy has a down side, radiation has a fear factor beyond the reality while the oil and coal and pesticide herbicide and persistent organic residues are hidden form of risk. When the real risk becomes 1 in 100 this is what is basically what is acceptable risk ( the risk level is set higher for any individual factor but synergy among all risks can bring the real cumulative risk this high, this is acceptable here in the US  ) praise be Reagan! So place the risk in perspective after all the lining of cans had BPA. PCB and dioxin is forever no half life.  This is not good but a better design might have helped no one has much experience with this kind of disaster of magnitude.  I can only hope that containment can be maintained.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-37885]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Altotus]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2011 15:14:44 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[RE: The nuclear situation in Japan is getting worse, experts worry about other plants in seismic zones]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-37931]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[#19, You have no idea how many people are going to get sick from this incident.  It's far from over at this point.  As a starting point I suspect that some of the workers who remained at the plants trying to get them under control will get sick.  Radiation poisoning is not something that makes you instantly sick until the dose is quite high.  It will take years to add up the ultimate toll in human lives.  I just hope it's not any worse than they've already said.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-37931]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[riverat1]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2011 14:20:16 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[RE: The nuclear situation in Japan is getting worse, experts worry about other plants in seismic zones]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-37930]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[There are SO many possible ways that disasters can hit a nuclear plant.  The 9/11 attacks were going to originally be on U.S. nuclear plants, but they figured that they would be too heavily defended with SAMs, etc.  Guess what?  We have NO defense of our nuclear plants!  Also, there is no way to ever get rid of the radioactive waste.  We bury it.  The half-life of Cesium-135 is 30 years.  We're generating radioactive garbage that will be around for a very, very long time...and we want to produce MORE of it?  What a travesty to leave this stuff that causes instant genetic mutations and cancer to future generations to have to deal with!  I say, put solar on every single roof in America.  We'd have enough energy.  Nobody is putting the money and effort into this solution.  It's sustainable essentially forever, doesn't endanger the earth, and doesn't leave a trail of crap for future generations to get sick and die from.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-37930]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Tamalaine]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2011 14:18:51 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[RE: The nuclear situation in Japan is getting worse, experts worry about other plants in seismic zones]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-37926]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[One other thing. How many people have even been made sick so far?? ZERO???]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-5565-37926]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[KuhnKat]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2011 13:43:38 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

