On 11/27/2011 11:12 PM, Dinesh Shah (દિનેશ શાહ/दिनेश शाह) wrote: > On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 1:08 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Sunday 27 November 2011 12:34:06 Rony wrote: >>> On 11/27/2011 12:14 PM, [email protected] wrote: >>>> IF we had to factor in the clean up and compensation costs, none of us >>>> would want that lovely thing. Fukushima total generated power >>>> USD25billion total recovery cost 75billion (with very very lax accounting >>>> norms) and climbing. >>> Past accidents should be used to make future systems safer, not throw >>> them out altogether. >> Ah. So let a few million babies with birth defects be born due to some >> accident on existing reactors, then we will find out ways to make it safe. In >> the meantime we will continue with the halflife problem for 250 odd years. >> >> Nice going. >> >> On second thought it might actually be a good idea to have  reactors all >> over >> the planet 50 km apart.  You will be guaranteed a disaster in all of them >> (only that you would not know - state secrets, in every country ;-E. Indian >> reactors are totally safe lol). Which should cull our population to >> extinction and actually save the earth. Nature and life will do just fine >> without the parasites known as humans. > BTW, far more number of people die in road and rail accidents in India > and around the world than nuclear reactors going bust. > > Should we ban all road and rail travel? after all auto-mobiles and > rail are also considered technology. > > May I also add air travel and air crashes.
-- Freedom is a shared resource. Take some, leave the rest for others. Please trim your replies. Avoid cross posting to other lists. Post your replies below the relevant original text, leaving a line space. Regards, Rony. http://ronybill.blogspot.com/ -- http://mm.ilug-bom.org.in/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
