costs

[Michael Stabin <stabin@npd.ufpe.br>]

> ``This industry promised us energy that was too cheap to meter,
> but instead it has produced a mountain of waste that is too
> expensive to clean up. ...

This is another example of disingenuous statement that should be spoken
against.  It is quite reasonable to be opposed to nuclear power and to work
against it.  Rational arguments should be met with reasoned dialogue (my
thanks to Norm Cohen for his tone in this regard on this list). Complete
falsehoods, as are all too common, should be countered with facts, showing
the error, attacking the error but not necessarily the messenger.  This kind
of strategy above should also be publicly refuted, from groups that say "we
will do everything we can to make nuclear incredibly expensive through
protracted litigation and forced retrofitting of safety systems" (which we
do not force on other power technologies), but then "look how expensive this
technology is, it's a failure!".  Everyone agrees that the initial
predictions were too rosy.  But nuclear has had cost overruns principally
because of political and not technical concerns; the responsibility lies
with the anti-nuke groups.  It is a valid political tactic, when taken
alone.  But when coupled with an accusation of failure at the industry for
complying with these demands, it becomes a form of lying to the American
public (which they have had quite enough of lately), and should not go
unanswered.


Michael Stabin
Departamento de Energia Nuclear/UFPE
Av. Prof. Luiz Freire, 1000 - Cidade Universitaria
CEP 50740 - 540
Recife - PE
Brazil
Phone 55-81-271-8251 or 8252 or 8253
Fax  55-81-271-8250
E-mail stabin@npd.ufpe.br

"Quantum Mechanics: The dreams stuff is made of"
- Steven Wright


************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html