Talk:Earthlife Africa

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Portal	This environment-related article is part of the Environment WikiProject to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. See WikiProject Environment and Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the assessment scale.

[edit] Neutrality

Yes, my attempts towards neutrality are clumsy. The best way to cover this is to have a criticism section, which mentions sourced criticism of all types. Describing its current position should be done using current documentation and actions. Greenman 22:27, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

There is no evidence of Earthlife being criticized for being too radical. The current criticism is that it has become too conservative and focused on lobbying as opposed to action. Ethnopunk 13:11, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

They're criticised all the time in the mainstream press for being too radical, freaks who oppose nuclear power, etc :) Greenman 21:41, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Coming from South Africa's liberal-conservative press, I would say that makes ELA liberal, not even radical or progressive.

Ethnopunk 13:25, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

They could, however, be critisized for acting on incomplete and incorrect information. It does not take much research to discover that coal-fired power plants are much more harmful than nuclear plants. Indeed, they release more radioactive isotopes (which were contained in the coal) into the air than even the low-grade waste from nuclear plants do. In South Africa, for example, the burying of radioactive waste at Vaalputs makes the area LESS radioactive, as the waste emits less radiation than the normal background radiation from the soil in the area. Any fears about leakage from the reactors themselves are also completely unfounded. The only reason Chernobyl failed catastrophically was because of and extremely stupid reactor design, as well as the Russians being to cheap to build concrete containment buildings around the reactors. (The negative effect of Chernobyl's failure wasn't even that big, anyway, read the article.) The only result of Earthlife Africa's agitation against the building of new PBMR's in South Africa is that the process has been slowed down, causing a potential slowdown of economic growth. They might not be radical, but they sure are stupid... Oom Kosie 17:57, 9 June 2007 (UTC)