On 16 Jul 2001, at 20:50, Dan Minette wrote:
> I'm away from home, surfing the net at night from a customer's
> location (with permission of course.) So, I will not answer the
> radiation question in detail. But,
>
> "Marc Erickson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I've been following this debate with interest, as I've always
> >been a proponent of green power and green ways. In the past, I was
> > >opposed to nuclear power, but reading the facts that Dan has been
> > >posting has convinced me that, if not green, nuclear is less dirty
> > >>than
> >our other current forms of large scale power generation.
>
> I appreciate the complement. I think your summation in the last
> sentence is very close to what I mean by green: it is the most green
> alternative at the present time. I also think better long term
> solutions will require fundamental breakthroughs, not just new
> applicatons of technology.
Sure, IF we make them. What IF we don't? What happens then?
R&D is important, but we cannot count on it producing in time to
make a difference...we have to work with what we have now.
Most capitalists dislike that intensely...but hey, it's TRUE.
Andy
Dawn Falcon
