"Nuclear Hazelnut" Spins Nuclear Lies About Health & Safety & Conservative News Outlet Promulgates Same Lies & More

Article posted with permission from the author, Suzanne Hamner.

Just one day after the article, “The Legacy of Nuclear Is Not Looking Before You Leap”, was published, the article, “Majority of US Women are opposed to nuclear energy, and advocates are asking why”, was posted on Just The News. The outlet highlights a post on X, formerly Twitter, from Jenifer Avallaneda Diaz, known as “Nuclear Hazelnut”, who claims to be a “PRA & Nuclear Risk Analysis Engineer @ WECNuclear.

According to Just The News:

Nuclear advocate Jenifer Avallaneda Diaz — known as Nuclear Hazelnut on X — laid out some facts about nuclear waste in a pinned post on her X feed. Nuclear power plants, she explains, produce a very small amount of waste, most of which can be recycled, for the amount of power they produce. The waste is stored safely and no one has ever been harmed by it, and the harmful radiation diminishes in about 300 years. 

• Buy All-American!
• Bring health and vitality back to your body with these non-transdermal patches
• Get your Vitamin B17 & Get 10% Off With Promo Code TIM
• How To Protect Yourself From 5G, EMF & RF Radiation – Use promo code TIM to save $$$
• The Very Best All-American Made Supplements On The Maret
• Grab This Bucket Of Heirloom Seeds & Save with Promo Code TIM
• Here’s A Way You Can Stockpile Food For The Future
• Stockpile Your Ammo & Save $15 On Your First Order
• Preparing Also Means Detoxifying – Here’s One Simple Way To Detoxify
• The Very Best Chlorine Dioxide
• All-American, US Prime, High Choice Grass-Fed Beef with NO mRNA, hormones or antibiotics… ever!

“The ‘waste problem’ doesn’t even require a solution; it’s not a problem at all,” Diaz states. 

The post is accompanied by a photo of herself wearing safety glasses, a hard hat, and high-visibility safety vest, as she stands next to some cooling towers. When she’s not advocating for nuclear energy, Diaz is a nuclear engineer at Westinghouse. This makes her a bit unique as 83% of nuclear engineers are male.

Here is her entire X Post.

Most of the conversations that I have about nuclear energy, leads to the same question: “- but what about the waste? -What waste? -Well, you know, it remains highly hazardous for a long time and…” Let me tell you 3 facts about nuclear spent fuel: A nuclear power plant, supplying energy to a large city with millions of residents, consumes less than half a liter of uranium daily, resulting in less than half a liter of spent fuel produced each day. AND: About ~95% of this waste can be recycled, like France currently does. No human has ever been harmed by nuclear waste. Contrary to common perception, spent nuclear fuel is in solid form, securely packaged in high-level waste containers (ultra-strong containers) designed to withstand extreme conditions and provide secure long-term storage for radioactive materials. Also, we have precise knowledge of its location and composition. After ~300 years, the harmful radiation diminishes. Therefore, we store it in deep geological repositories. Finland’s repository, Onkalo, is a notable example, with negligible environmental impact. The ‘waste problem’ doesn’t even require a solution; it’s not a problem at all. And remember: Are you actively advocating for saving the planet? Excellent idea! Construct more nuclear power plants. The more, the faster, the better. This isn’t an opinion; it’s science.

What she is saying goes against what many researchers (Arnie Gundersen, Helen Caldicott, etc.) and those in the documentary “SOS: The San Onofre Syndrome: Nuclear Power’s Legacy” and industry have indicated. Even the information covered in the article at Sons of Liberty Media identifies Nuclear Regulatory Commission reports that indicate nuclear sites have leaked tritium. And, it is widely known that the Hanford Nuclear Reservation dumped 400 billion gallons of contaminated water, containing unknown radioactive particles, into the Columbia River.

While Diaz states “a nuclear power plant, …, consumes less than half a liter of uranium daily, resulting in less than half a liter of spent fuel produced each day”, there are waste products contained in the water used to keep the reactor cool. That is radioactive waste that must be managed and eventually discarded. If France has a means to “recycle” 95% of this waste, why has that technology not been shared with the US? If it has, why are companies engaged in nuclear power production not using it?

Spent nuclear fuel (solid form) is currently contained in canisters that are only designed to last approximately 20 years. How does anyone know that after approximately 300 years the harmful radiation diminishes? That goes against what many in the industry have claimed when looking at the half-life of the nuclear fuel by-products. But, Diaz never addresses the wastewater nor does she address the frequent leaks occurring at numerous nuclear power plants all around the united States. Contrary to Diaz’s claim, not all spent nuclear fuel is stored in “deep geological repositories”, i.e. San Onofre Nuclear Generation Station and Coldwater Creek.

The biggest issue with Diaz’s post is “no human has ever been harmed by nuclear waste.” That is a big statement without any proof to back it up. Most of the information on radiation illnesses concern accidents (Chernobyl, Fukushima, Three Mile Island) or atomic blasts. Conveniently, the incidents of individuals being sick from improperly stored nuclear waste in Coldwater Creek are ignored.

An investigation earlier this year by The Missouri Independent and MuckRock found that, for decades, private companies and federal agencies knew the haphazardly handled waste posed a risk to human health and the environment but downplayed it.

Following World War II, uranium refined in downtown St. Louis was dumped, uncovered, at the city’s airport. Chunks of radioactive waste fell from trucks on the road from the processing facility to St. Louis County.

Once at the airport, the wind and rainwater carried the waste into Coldwater Creek, which won’t be fully remediated for another 15 years.

Tens of thousands of people were exposed to this “nuclear waste” in Coldwater Creek and in St. Louis. “A federal study found elevated rates of breast, colon, prostate, kidney and bladder cancers as well as leukemia in the area. Childhood brain and nervous system cancer rates are also higher.”. But, according to Diaz, “no human has ever been harmed by nuclear waste”.

The entire article by Just The News highlights that more men support nuclear power than women, according to a Pew Research Center poll.

Buried in the article by Just The News is this little caveat.

The Three Mile Island accident resulted in no deaths or adverse health impacts, but media coverage of the event was instrumental in turning the tide of public opinion in the U.S. away from nuclear energy. In 1977, public support for nuclear power was at an all-time high, with 69% of Americans supporting the industry. After the incident at Three Mile Island, public support for nuclear energy fell to 46%. Public sentiment may have been altered by the release of “The China Syndrome.” a 1979 hit movie in which reporters discover safety discrepancies in a fictitious California nuclear electric generation plant. A greedy and corrupt utility ignores and covers up safety issues. The movie preceded the Three Mile Island accident by only a few weeks and was still in theaters when the accident occurred. [Emphasis Mine.]

While the World Nuclear Association reports there were no deaths or adverse health impacts from the accident at Three Mile Island, residents initially reported nausea, vomiting, hair loss, and skin rashes. These reports have led to increasing reports of serious health issues, cancers, and aberrations noted in the animal and plant ecosystem. “A 2017 study suggesting a correlation between radiation exposure at Three Mile Island and a type of thyroid cancer only heightened the debate.”

No definitive study has been done to confirm or deny whether the illnesses residents experienced living near Three Mile Island at the time of the incident were caused by the accident. In fact, “the general dearth of conclusive scientific studies has, at times, made the residents the target of skepticism and led to failed lawsuits against Three Mile Island owners.”

Why have these definitive studies never been done?

In this day and age, do you trust any government agency or world organization to tell the truth about anything? The entire environment in government and world organizations is secrecy to protect themselves.

And, what about the movie “The China Syndrome”? It sounds very similar to what has been experienced by residents near the San Onofre Nuclear Generation Station.

Plant Vogtle, near Waynesboro, GA and owned by Southern Nuclear Operating Company, has a sinking nuclear reactor (Vogtle Reactor Unit 3), which was not disclosed to the public. According to fairewinds.org, “a leaning tower and failing foundation at a nuke plant is a meltdown waiting to happen.” A newly constructed nuclear power plant started leaning during construction and is sinking into the red clay. The owners knew about it and only amended their license to establish a program to “monitor” the lack of stability in the foundation. Moreover, just this past summer, Plant Vogtle’s reactor 3 had to be shut down because of a “valve issue”.

One of the two newest nuclear reactors at Georgia Power’s Plant Vogtle has been shut down due to a “valve issue,” the Atlanta-based utility announced Tuesday.

Operators at the plant’s Unit 3 safely shut down the reactor on July 8 due to lowering water levels in the steam generators caused by a problem with a valve on one of three main pumps. The main pumps send water that has been heated from the condenser through a series of heaters to be sent back to the steam generators.

The valve that caused the problem controls water levels in the steam generator.

Remember, steam generators were in operation at San Onofre. How much about this valve issue is being hidden? And what about the leaning wall and sinking reactor Unit 3?

Vogtle was the first nuclear reactor built in the united States in three decades. It was delayed seven years due to a series of cost overruns caused by the bankruptcy of Westinghouse – the prime contractor, and the CONvid-1984 planned scam-demic. Who rescued this nuclear energy power plant debacle? It was Georgia ratepayers. Nuclear energy is not “rescuing” the people in Georgia; the people in Georgia are rescuing nuclear energy.

Westinghouse is very familiar as Jenifer Avallaneda Diaz works for the company.

Just The News highlighted an op-ed in “Real Clear Energy” written by Gabriella Hoffman. Hoffman, director of the Center for Energy and Conservation at the Independent Women’s Forum (IWF), outlines “facts” she believes will address women’s perceptions of nuclear power. Hoffman references “nuclear energy’s safety records”, the small footprint it yields, and “rigorous oversight under which it operates.” Hoffman blames the disparity of support for nuclear energy between men and women on the accidents at Chernobyl and Three Mile Island. Hoffman claims, “A lot of the media kind of hyperventilating about nuclear has been overhyped.”

And here it all is in a nutshell.

Hoffman said that the lack of support from women doesn’t stem from a visceral dislike of nuclear energy, but it more stems from media the information they’re fed about the industry.

“They tend to be inclined to certain environmental causes, more so than men, and some of the information they’re being fed by legacy environmental groups has distorted their views,” she said. 

Unlike wind and solar, which are intermittent and take up lots of land, Hoffman said, the Trump administration could appeal to women’s concerns about the environment by pointing to the zero-emission, small-footprint electricity that nuclear power is capable of providing. 

“When they have that information readily available to them, I think they’ll start to warm up to the technology more. That’s our hope at the Center for Energy and Conservation,” Hoffman said.

As mentioned in the documentary about San Onofre Nuclear Generation Station, it is all about resolving a public relations image.

The entire nuclear age was built upon secrecy surrounding the production of atomic bombs – weapons of mass destruction. As we have discovered, that secrecy still exists today, not only to protect their horrendous weapons, but to protect the profits of those engaged in nuclear energy production at the expense of safety, oversight, the health of the people, and the environment. With Trump soon to be inaugurated, advocates for further development of nuclear energy to power the country are hoping to “cash in” on his “popularity” with the people, women in particular, to soothe concerns over the problems that still exist to push a fallacy of zero carbon emissions. As has been reported, safety issues, including in construction, are happening and being glossed over, with reassurance to the public that all is well and “there is nothing to see here.”

Don’t take anyone’s word for anything! Do your own research and make up your own mind. The State of Georgia is now grappling with a nuclear power reactor that is sinking due to faulty construction and has suffered a “safety issue” within one year of startup.

Also, check out  “Indian Point:  Imagining the Unimaginable” on Max – documentary in 2002 by Rory Kennedy featuring Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and “Indian Point” (2015) on Apple TV.

Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media