Dan Minette wrote:

>But, as an aside, I'd look carefully at any claims made in a government
>advocacy website. I'd want to cross check those claims against other
>sources.  Not calling the Dutch government liars, just thinking that every
>advocacy group does put spin on their message.

This also applies to nuclear proponents, though, doesn't it? I know very 
little about nuclear power, but I do know that almost all research on GE 
in the US is sponsored by Monsanto, which is a bit of a, um, well, 
conflict of interest there. Science is, technically, unbiased, but as you 
so helpfully point out all groups with a vested interest in proving 
something right tend to put a spin on their message. And this does, sadly 
enough, include scientists looking for grant money.

>However, that doesn't affect the main question of credibility.  Where is
>credible evidence that Western nuclear power plants have caused health
>difficulties and/or death?

I have to go to class right now, and additionally I waver on the nuclear 
issue, but I wish to god I had my ENS textbooks here. There were some 
good figures in there. In the meantime, you guys seem to be deteriorating 
into static here. Jeroen, here's a website for you:

http://www.ans.org/pi/ps/

This is the American Nuclear Society: does everyone agree they're 
"credible"? Great. Dan and the rest of you guys, here's one for you:

http://www.ieer.org/reports/npd.html

This is from the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, which I 
presume is a pretty credible organization; and it was written by a Ph.D, 
later published as a book, and contains full references and footnotes. I 
don't know what *kind* of Ph.D, but I think it can safely qualify as 
credible.

What follows below is opinion, loosely based on memories of my classwork. 
Take it with a grain of salt.

Nuclear power *is* green, and there are a lot of regulations to make it 
safe. However, it is silly to claim that it is perfect. First, there is 
the oft-referenced problem of what happens when the things *do* blow, not 
to mention the waste products and their nasty health effects if they make 
it into the environment. I'm sure you've all debated this point to death 
and so I won't bother. Let's look at the bottom line: let's look at 
*costs*. First, you've got to build the plant. This is expensive, as are 
the materials (uranium, ect.), but that's only the beginning. Now, once 
the plant's built it doesn't take much to run it, which is what nuclear 
propents base their "cheap, clean power" arguements on. However, these 
good people always seem to forget the *other* costs. Waste disposal isn't 
just a bit risky; if done properly it's *expensive*. Massively expensive. 
There's transport, there's storage containers, there's the costs of 
monitoring... all expensive as hell. Plus, nuclear power plants do not 
last forever- what's the figure, fifty years? (Memory, memory, where are 
you?) Once they go out they must be decommissioned, which is at *least*- 
if my memory serves, considerably *more*- as expensive as building the 
things in the first place.

Once you add up the costs- we did this in class, dammit, where are my 
notes when I need 'em?- you'll find that the cost of nuclear power, 
looked at holistically, is flat-out astronomical. Add this to the 
admittedly statistically slender chances of a goof and I think you'll 
find that even Jeroen's solar panel system isn't that far off in price.

And the sad fact is that some nuclear power plants will, in this 
marvelous capitalist world, try to get around this by cutting corners; 
and that our government will, probably with the best intentions, look the 
other way as they have with emissions controls on standard power plants. 
As the costs go down, the risks go up. As people stop using expensive 
galvanized steel canisters to store wastes, or haul the stuff to a site 
that's just a *little* bit less stable but an awfully long way closer, 
the chances of a leak- and those serious health risks- go up. 

I like the idea of nuclear. It sounds like a wonderful thing. But looked 
at closely, it just doesn't hold up. My position has been to at least try 
to listen to both sides and hope <sigh> for cold fusion....

Kat Feete


--------------------
I don't make jokes- I just watch the government and 
report the facts.
                              -Will Rogers


Reply via email to