Robert Owen wrote:
> Michael S Lorrey wrote:
>
> > What stumbles occured with nuclear power? Even counting Chernobyl (more
> > a result of socialism than nuclear technology) and the two bombs dropped
> > on Japan there are still fewer people killed by nuclear technology in
> > its entire history than are killed every year by the pollution of coal
> > burning technology, and coal burning plants put more radioactive
> > materials into the environment every day than the entire US nuclear
> > industry has released in its history. While some countries are shutting
> > down their nuclear plants, they are increasing output at their coal
> > plants, and are buring lower quality coal than ever before. China burns
> > coal for most of its capacity that is so dirty that it would be criminal
> > to burn here in the US.
>
> Tightly reasoned, Michael; would you agree that what is needed is
> greatly increased funding for research aimed at BOTH non-nuclear
> AND non-combustible energy generation that was cost-effective
> and bio-safe?
If the technology fits within the current economic range of cost effectiveness,
yes. Making people switch from an energy source that costs $0.05 per kWh to a
source that costs $0.50 per kWh is not only just cruel, but its very stupid and
causes actually MORE pollution in the end. (experienced energy analyst here).
> In the meantime, I am inclined to agree with you that an objective
> risk-benefit comparative analysis of our current leading technologies
> suggests a rational preference for nuclear power.
Thats the problem, isn't it? Expecting people to be rational.
-- TANSTAAFL!!!Michael S. Lorrey Member, Extropy Institute http://www.extropy.org Member, National Rifle Association http://www.nra.org "Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils." - General John Stark
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:05:32 MDT