The 60 Minutes Fukushima nuclear infomercial, Independent AustraliaNoel Wauchope 23 October 2018 A FEW YEARS AGO, Channel 9’s
60 Minutes did an excellent investigation of the
Fukushima nuclear accident.
This Fukushima investigation was compered by Liz Hayes. I recall that, at the time, the program was a much more thorough, serious and well-resourced presentation than anything put forward by even the ABC or SBS.
However, I was pretty appalled at the latest 60 Minutes coverage of the Fukushima issue, which screened on Sunday (21 October) titled, Is nuclear power the solution to our energy crisis?
The main message of this program is a call to scrap Australia’s legislation against establishing the nuclear industry. The argument given is that we need nuclear power because it is supposedly cheap and dependable. We also need it because it is supposedly essential to combat climate change.
This time, the reporter is not Liz Hayes. It’s Tom Steinfort, who is described as a “seasoned Channel 9 star”. Does a seasoned Channel 9 star just accept without question the claims made in this episode?
Among claims made:
If Mr Steinfort really is a star reporter, I would expect him to have done his homework before swallowing these claims hook line and sinker. ………
So, what do we make of this latest offering about Fukushima, from 60 Minutes? It must have taken a lot of money and a lot of negotiation to get a 60 Minutes camera team inside the Fukushima nuclear station. I assume that the negotiations were largely arranged by Ben Heard, who has influential nuclear contacts overseas — particularly in Russia and South Africa, where he has been a prominent nuclear spokesperson. In Russia, Heard launched Rosatom National Geographic — a nuclear soft sell environmental program.
I think that we can be sure of one thing. As Japan plans for the 2020 Olympics – some sections of which are to take place in Fukushima Prefecture – the Japanese Government is not likely to permit a team with any anti-nuclear perspective access to the crippled nuclear power plant.
The 60 Minutes media team would have had to have the Japanese authorities on side. I would bet, some companies keen to set up the nuclear industry in Australia would also be on side and keen to assist.
There have been rumblings, too, of yet another resurgence for nuclear energy in Australia, with Prime Minister Scott Morrison declaring that he is ‘open to the idea of nuclear power’ and that ‘the source of Australia’s energy doesn’t bother him and he isn’t interested in an ideological debate’.
Is it too much to hope that Channel 9 might do something to correct this nuclear infomercial and give us a different, more comprehensive view, rather than one blessed by Japanese authorities and the nuclear power lobby? https://independentaustralia.net/business/business-display/the-60-minutes-fukushima-nuclear-infomercial,12023
Hi Christina. I was driven to a determined place by that appalling 60 Minutes piece. So much so that I have spent the week typing. Which means lots of typos to go back and correct. Combined with the IPCC stating that all CO2 release into air must stop by 2050, I attempted to calculate certain things. How many solar home panels would needed, how many other forms of generation would be needed and so on. I’m pretty convinced my arithmetic is incorrect due to my confusion about capacity of various generation. The problematic post is here: https://nuclearexhaust.wordpress.com/2018/10/24/electricity-generation-in-australia/ If you or anyone else would be able to check the thing over and come up with accurate figures I would greatly appreciate it. I dont trust my own arithmetic or ability to come up with the right answer. Apart from saying its a big job which doesnt need the waste of time nukers are imposing on the problem via blatant propaganda in the mass media. Regards
Paul Langley
If you don’t trust your own arithmetic, Paul, – I am flattered and amazed that you think mine is OK. I am asking a couple of friends to check it out, too.