Quote of the Day
A certain amount of opposition is a great help to a person. Kites rise against, not with the wind.
John Neal
Fukushima Nuclear Incident Update
Hiroshima Syndrome continues to give its unique practitioner spin on events, explaining the creativity and difficult work going on behind the scenes, e.g., cleaning out the emergency diesels for reactors 5 and 6, which were knocked out by the tsunami, and fashioning the emergency power cable to unit 2 out of 40-year transmission lines. The author also mentioned other details I haven't seen addressed elsewhere, i.e., the transmission towers (providing regular operational power at the plant). He also points out the motivation for spraying water onto the spent fuel pools even if they weren't empty; evaporation lowers the water barrier over the spent fuel, significantly increasing the risk of radiation levels by factors of 10 (for each foot of water).
NEI reports that we have control room lighting in reactor 3 with a relevant connection to reactor 4 expected in the near future. (The temporary power panel to reactor 2 had previously been established along with an interconnection to reactor 1.) The electrical connection between reactor 3 to reactor 4 was in process. The reactors 1, 3 and 4 are more problematic because of additional earthquake or other structural damage (beyond post-tsunami issues with containment vessels). Thermometers are functional for the first 3 reactors, and work is being done on the electrical residual heat removal system for reactor 3. Additional water was sprayed into reactor 2 and reactor 3 spent fuel ponds. Ambient radiation levels at the site continue to decrease, demonstrating efficacy of the spraying activities.
There was an interesting The Japan Times column from a top US hematologist Robert Gale, whom treated Chernobyl victims, criticizing the US recommended expansion of an 80-kilometer (vs 20-kilometer) radius from the incident sites, declaring the Japanese boundary conservative. He notes the biggest risk, e.g., from surrounding farmland, is any measurable exposure to cesium-137, which has a half-life of 3 decades.
NEI reports that we have control room lighting in reactor 3 with a relevant connection to reactor 4 expected in the near future. (The temporary power panel to reactor 2 had previously been established along with an interconnection to reactor 1.) The electrical connection between reactor 3 to reactor 4 was in process. The reactors 1, 3 and 4 are more problematic because of additional earthquake or other structural damage (beyond post-tsunami issues with containment vessels). Thermometers are functional for the first 3 reactors, and work is being done on the electrical residual heat removal system for reactor 3. Additional water was sprayed into reactor 2 and reactor 3 spent fuel ponds. Ambient radiation levels at the site continue to decrease, demonstrating efficacy of the spraying activities.
There was an interesting The Japan Times column from a top US hematologist Robert Gale, whom treated Chernobyl victims, criticizing the US recommended expansion of an 80-kilometer (vs 20-kilometer) radius from the incident sites, declaring the Japanese boundary conservative. He notes the biggest risk, e.g., from surrounding farmland, is any measurable exposure to cesium-137, which has a half-life of 3 decades.
Guest Editorial: The $6B Scam, Reason.com: Thumbs UP!
I have issues with Governor Jerry Brown (D-CA), whom is reluctant to alienate his powerful union supporters in taking on the California pension Ponzi scheme, but occasionally he shows flashes of fiscal conservatism. Here he's taking on well-meaning but ineffective enterprise zone and RDA's. One should never underestimate the difficulty of uprooting entrenched politically-connected government bureaucracies. Now, Governor Brown, about those scores of dubious boutique agencies, commissions, etc.
Palin in India Takes a Shot at McCain
I was viewing the rerun of The O'Reilly Factor when Bill O'Reilly played a questions-and-answers clip from Sarah Palin's trip to India. The interviewer was asking Palin to explain the results of the 2008 election. She explained that Obama was the change candidate. She then goes on to add that she, too, represented change, but she was not at the top of the ticket, a not-so-subtle slap at the one person whom is responsible for taking an obscure state governor under an existing ethics probe (Troopergate) into the spotlight.
It's too easy to respond to Sarah Palin. First of all, the selection of Sarah Palin was a strategic mistake; it undermined McCain's experience argument against Obama, and her ABC and CBS interviews badly undercut her credibility, particularly with independents and moderates, badly hurting McCain in crucial swing states. (There's no doubt Palin helped motivate voter turnout in red states, but this was mostly pushing on a string.) Even respected Republicans like Colin Powell and former President George W. Bush regarded the Palin selection as a crucial mistake. Sarah Palin had the highest net unfavorable ratings for any VP candidate over the past 30 years--and that was before she resigned two-thirds of the way through her only term as governor of a sparsely-populated state which relies on natural resource income for funding. Was the Palin selection the only reason McCain lost? No: the economy was the most important factor, and McCain was vastly outspent. But I'm convinced the election would have been closer.
Second, I think the election of Obama was not about "change" per se (although Democratic partisans will naturally differ). Clearly Obama had an advantage in leading the opposition to a party whose incumbent leader had an abnormally low 30% approval rating. McCain had well-known differences with Bush, but I think McCain's argument was primarily based on his military and foreign relations expertise and other than a fiscal conservative bent, particularly on earmarks, he seemed mostly disengaged on domestic issues--in the middle of the biggest recession in decades. Obama benefited from being the challenger during a recession, something that favored Reagan and Clinton during their initial Presidential candidacies; as a Democrat, Obama could reassure anxious voters about economic security, e.g., unemployment insurance, entitlements, etc. Many of the independents and moderates were impressed with Obama's perceived relative youth, intelligence, articulation, calm demeanor, and moderation. (However, this likability did not transfer to his policies like health care. Obama did not quite understand that voters react to perceived threats to their health care as much as they don't like uncertainty about their federal entitlements; he always felt it was just a matter of finding the right political spin...) There was also something intrinsically American about the Obama success story: a biracial child born during a time when many African Americans faced discrimination but who grew up to be elected President.
But the fact that despite massive publicity and the highest GOP approval rating unlike any other potential candidate, Sarah Palin has not reached 20% in a non-PPP (Democratic) poll since last July, has not won a single poll tracked by RealClearPolitics this year and trails Huckabee (19.7) and Romney (18.9) by 3 points. Gallup has her at 38-53 unfavorable, the highest net unfavorable since the 2008 election--and climbing. Adding insult to injury, the PPP (D) tongue-in-cheek poll has dysfunctional actor/celebrity Charlie Sheen, with a 10% approval rating, beating Sarah Palin 41-36% among independents.
Keep in mind that except for a few conservatives like me, nobody from the GOP has criticized Sarah Palin. I think her tax-and-spend record, the resignation, her ethics problems (e.g., her PAC and Troopergate), her lack of qualifications for the office, and her unelectable status (very poor showing in matchups against Obama) are all fair game. It's almost a given she'll try to portray her opponents as elitists and try to play the victimization card (those bad boys picking on an innocent girl!) You can expect her to play the same rope-a-dope game against her competition like she did during the 2006 gubernatorial campaign, dismissing her competition as little more than a chef and a statistician and making a virtue of her inexperience.
Keep in mind that except for a few conservatives like me, nobody from the GOP has criticized Sarah Palin. I think her tax-and-spend record, the resignation, her ethics problems (e.g., her PAC and Troopergate), her lack of qualifications for the office, and her unelectable status (very poor showing in matchups against Obama) are all fair game. It's almost a given she'll try to portray her opponents as elitists and try to play the victimization card (those bad boys picking on an innocent girl!) You can expect her to play the same rope-a-dope game against her competition like she did during the 2006 gubernatorial campaign, dismissing her competition as little more than a chef and a statistician and making a virtue of her inexperience.
Guest Editorial: Are Cheap States Defunding Higher Ed? Thumbs UP!
Consider the following chart relevant to the unsustainable college cost bubble from Dr. Perry's excellent Carpe Diem blog. Neal McCluskey explodes some of the myths of rising tuition costs including allegations of lower state support of its colleges; much of it has to do (with lower/high school education) of lower student-teacher ratios and government-subsidized financial aid packages, including the recruitment of dubious high-risk, less qualified college students, based on often unrealistic expectations of the hyped earnings potential of a college degree.
Political Humor
Remember when President Obama said we can’t fight two wars and vowed to change our policy? Well, he did. Now we’re fighting three wars. - Jay Leno
[The change President Obama stood for was his mind after the election...]
Obama said we will send economic aid to Libya to help the Libyan people reach their dreams. And if that works, they’ll try it here. - Jay Leno
[On hearing of Obama's commitment, Egyptian border guards hiked their bribe demands.]
Musical Interlude: My Favorite Groups
The Beach Boys, "God Only Knows". From the legendary 1966 "Pet Sounds", one of the greatest pop albums ever released. This is the first of my Beach Boys series. I have previously embedded these songs in the blog: "Good Vibrations", "Sloop John B" and "Surfin' USA".
