> the 'Industrial Physicist' Magazine (a good rag!) > covers these topics routinely > > the consensus (as i read it) of their writers is that fission power > offers the best set of trade offs currently, esp. if breeders are > considered since the amount of waste is much lower from breeders
Not to say that I /know/ more than those guys, but when talking of trade-offs, you need to take benefits and damages, quantify them and weigh them with factors, right? First, there is a problem with /objectively/ quantifying many of the issues involved. Second, there is a problem with coming up with /objective/ relative weights. Both calculations are highly subjective, and depend a lot on the prerogatives you use. Third, they usually don't use traditional risk analysis. When you apply that (risk is the sum of probability times damage for every possible incident), most nuclear technologies don't get a good rating. The other thing is that probably the cleanest "source" is more efficient use of energy. The USA uses more than double the energy per capita than similarly industrialized countries with a similar level of comfort elsewhere (Japan, UK, Germany, France -- data from the USA DOE http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/international/iealf/tablee1c.xls). Seems to me that there is a definite room for improvement. Gerhard ____________________________________________________________ You are subscribed to the OT discussion forum To Post messages: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe and Other Options: http://techservinc.com/mailman/listinfo/ot_techservinc.com Browse or Search Old Archives (2001-2004): http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] Browse or Search Current Archives (2004-Current): http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
