The Media Takes On The Nuclear Industry After Sandy Failures

A long list of media outlets are criticizing the nuclear industry and the safety lapses exposed by hurricane Sandy. While the nuclear industry talking heads have bragged up Sandy as a “success” because there were no major nuclear disasters, it has been pointed out everywhere that this is a public relations deception.

Multiple plants lost grid power, had to shutdown, lower power or had failures that challenged critical reactor systems.

Questions remain about Oyster Creek’s specific systems through the alert and information on the intake pump damage at Salem has been slim.

United Press International said nuclear plant safety was questioned by Sandy.
Washington Post highlighted how little is known about the real natural risks in the US and how dangerously close these plants are to major population centers.
The New York Times points out today that US nuclear reactors lack filters for their emergency vent system. This puts the public at great risk. The nuclear industry is opposing this because they do not want to spend the money.
Guardian UK says that US regulators and nuclear plant owners leave everything to luck and questions US nuclear safety after Sandy.
The NewYorker calls the nuclear industry to the mat for their deceptive statements on Oyster Creek‘s emergency alert during Sandy.

The nuclear industry has been busy providing very deceptive statements claiming there are back up systems at reactors (without any details on these) or “everything worked as planned” with no proof or useful details to back up these claims. This corporate public relations distraction tactic is common in many industries to deflect criticism and avoid actually disclosing information to the public. This kind of tactic relies on an uneducated public willing to accept platitudes in lieu of information. It appears the media may have woken up to the tactic,  at least for now.

This article would not be possible without the extensive efforts of the SimplyInfo research team
Join the conversation at

© 2011-2023, All Rights Reserved Content cited, quoted etc. from other sources is under the respective rights of that content owner. If you are viewing this page on any website other than (or it may be plagiarized, please let us know. If you wish to reproduce any of our content in full or in more than a phrase or quote, please contact us first to obtain permission.



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: