>> The LOUC is the same as the bogeyman behind the tree, the 
>> glowing
>> green frogs, etc.  LOUC is proportional to the Hubris 
>> Factor.

This can be true, and too often is.
But using it as an excuse to ignore LOUC in all cases, or in 
cases where it suits one desires to do so, helps guarantee 
UC. Murphy loves this approach.

LOUC needs to be part, alas, of any study of a project of 
any magnitude. A good question (or two) is/are  "What is the 
worst possible outcome, and am I prepared to accept the 
possibility of that outcome occurring". The first question 
is often not able to be answered with accuracy but a skim 
over the release-candidate answers usually gives you a good 
clue to the second answer.

eg    As much for the stupidity that even engineers can 
manage as for the sermon:        The Clutha hydro dam is 
NZ's largest. To stand by the hydraulic jump at the bottom 
of its spillway when the lake is full is to look into the 
face of death at a few metres remove. Similar to standing in 
the hillside caverns at Lauterbrunnen where the Eiger melt 
water travels its subterranean path. An awe and fear 
inspiring experience in both cases. But not my point :-). 
The dam was built on top of an active faultline. Once the 
implications of this were reanalysed during the decade or so 
of construction they spent a vast amount of money not only 
strengthening the design but in modifying the hill tops 
around where the new lake would be to reduce potential size 
of the quake induced avalanches will occur in a major 
earthquake, so that any local 'tsunami' would be less likely 
to overtop the dam catastrophically. Competent people have 
reanalysed the result and claim that there is a reasonable 
prospect that the dam will fail given too probable to be 
nice circumstances.

If you offered me a cheap enough price on an Apricot orchard 
a mile downstream from the dam I'd happily consider retiring 
there without and great reference to the dam factor in my 
reckonings.

This does not prove my strong like of surfing but rather 
demonstrates that people who aregue for the predictability 
of nuclear waste storage can be about as one eyed in their 
decision making as I, and as the many current Clutha apricot 
farmers.



        Russell



-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist