Byron Jeff wrote:
>
> That's a given Russell. The question is what's the real risk.
> I'm about to jump in my car and go to work. I'm much more likely to be
> killed in a car accident than getting cancer from a nuclear power plant.
>
>   
That's correct. Let's analyse that. Probably because you are more 
inclined to BE in the car when
it crashes, maybe, and unlikely to be in a radioactive leak from a 
nuclear reactor?

> The most disastrous and most covered US nuclear accident was Three Mile
> Island. To hear the story told it was a total meltdown and the state on
> Pennsylvania was made barren. But the truth of the matter is that in the
> absolute worst accident in the nearly 60 years of US nuclear power
> generation, no one died and the incidence of the terrifying nuclear
> radiation induced cancer ridden mutant baby zombies was statistically
> imperceptable:
>
>   
I don't recall hearing about it in that way. But anyways, I'll take 
another crack at it.

Nuclear power works by heating steam to superheated levels, and spinning 
turbines with the steam.
The steam part has been around since before Telsa was a boy. The only 
thing new is that the steam
is heated by nuclear energy instead of wood or coal.

The difference between wood or coal and nuclear heat is the complexity. 
Maybe  humans can  keep
doing things right, and there will be no accident, but the odds are that 
sooner or later, there will be
a screwup. It happens with humans...we are simply big screw-ups.

Now we look at statistics. If we create a plethora of nuclear plants all 
over the US in addition to the
ones we have already, it stands to reason that an accident will occur 
eventually. If we have a LOT of
plants, we will increase our chances of having MORE or BIGGER accidents.

If a coal-fired plant has an accident, it catches fire and burns up, 
that's all. If a nuclear plant has an accident,
something more serious will happen, because nuclear power is serious 
business.

Let's look at the terrorist threat for a minute.  'course,  the Dems say 
there IS no terrorist threat, never was.
I believe that the security is so lax at most nuclear plants that a few 
old ladies with brooms could do enough
damage to put 'em off line.

Now, I will grant you that France seems to be doing pretty well with 
their systems. Frankly, I am astonished,
but perhaps they don't "kiss and tell" like we do here.

All I am saying is that some money oughta be tossed toward heating the 
steam with the sun instead of coal, gas,
wood, nuclear material, or whatever else pops up. But don't worry, there 
won't be. The crackpots still hold
sway.

--Bob A

> Accidents happen. We all know that. The question lays in the frequency and
> severity of these accidents. Tens of thousands die each year in cars, yet
> we drive them each and everyday. No one dies from nuclear power, but yet 60
> years later, it's still the boogieman.
>
>   

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