[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Request for suggestion
I think that you have become too immersed in your own arguments. Public
concerns about nuclear power are not over a theoretical, incremental increase
in the cancer rate. The concern is that many members of the public do not
trust the utilities or the government to operate the technology safely; eg.,
TMI, Chernobyl, and the many DOE fiascos. Unfortunately, there are enough
incidents out there to lend credibility to the anti-nuke arguments.
Trust will NOT be restored by comparative body counts (eg., "Chernobyl killed
1000 people , but coal killed 1002; hence nuclear is safer."). Trust will NOT
be restored by theological arguments about lnt, no matter how well
constructed.
What the nuclear power industry needs is an extended period of time with a
good operating record, i.e., low cost, high capacity factor, and no screwups.
To accomplish this, we need constructive critics, NOT apologists. The
industry failed by becoming defensive to the point of considering any critic
to be an enemy; just look at past events at Millstone. We are finally
beginning to turn this around. I hope that it's not too late.
What we really need is continuing agressive, but constructive self
evaluation, and a willingness to constantly improve ourselves.
The opinions expressed are strictly mine.
It's not about dose, it's about trust.
Bill Lipton
liptonw@dteenergy.com
Bernard L Cohen wrote:
> For the last 27 years, the principal focus of my life has been to
> do research related to societal impacts of nuclear power, and since that
> research has consistently led to my favoring that technology, to try to
> convince the public to support it. In these endeavors, I have authored
> four books plus chapters in several other books, I have published about
> 200 papers in various journals, and I have presented about 500 public
> talks for various audiences. In these and in my research, I have addressed
> every issue in the nuclear power debate.
>
> However, in my view there is one over-riding issue that is
> preventing general public acceptance of nuclear power -- the public thinks
> that nuclear power can cause cancer which kills people, and is therefore
> too dangerous for expanded use. I firmly believe that the future of
> nuclear power depends almost entirely on countering that misconception.
>
> My approach to countering it has been to point out that coal
> burning, our principal source of electricity generation, is estimated to
> kill 10,000 or more Americans every year with its air pollution, whereas
> nuclear power is estimated to kill less than 10 (including accidents and
> buried radioactive waste treated probabilistically, and accepting
> linear-no threshold theory). There is extensive scientific documentation
> supporting both of these estimates, 10,000 vs 10, and I believe they are
> generally accepted in the scientific community and by governmental
> agencies in U.S. and internationally. To me, this is a rational method for
> countering the public's misconception.
>
> However, I have recently been heavily attacked on RADSAFE for
> using this approach. In my responses to these attacks, I have asked for an
> alternative approach to countering the public's misconception about the
> dangers of nuclear power. However no suggestions that I can recognize as
> such have been offered. I am therefore left sorely in need of an
> alternative approach. Can someone please help me on this?
>
> Bernard L. Cohen
> Physics Dept.
> University of Pittsburgh
> Pittsburgh, PA 15260
> Tel: (412)624-9245
> Fax: (412)624-9163
> e-mail: blc@pitt.edu
>
> ************************************************************************
> The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
> information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html