[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Request for suggestion
The public is interested in 2 main objectives, be it source of energy
or buying a car.
When buying a car, the order of preference appears to be cost first,
and safety second. I say that because if safety were the prime issue,
small death trap cars would not be bought in such large numbers. The
buyer wants the most economical car they can buy, and hopefully, one
that also provides some degree of safety (often not the case).
In the area of energy sources, the order, as I see it is, safety
first and then cost. The cost of energy has increased in many places,
yet the acceptance of nuclear generated electricity has not increased
significantly, statistically speaking. In Europe the cost of energy
is very expensive, yet many countries are shutting down their nuclear
units. The concern is safety.
How does one help Bernie focus on the real issues that will change
the public's opinion? I don't know. There are too many paradigms that
need to be changed for there to be a general public acceptance of
nuclear power.
In the USA there is no real effort by any large pro-nuclear
organization to rebut accusations. The HPS doesn't do this, and when
I asked why not, I was told that they do not have the mechanisms in
place to really go out and spend large funds on public education. I
suggested that they eliminate the annual trek by the president-elect,
who travels to each chapter around the country, and funnel those
funds in to public education, TV spots, radio spots, etc. That's not
about to happen.
The Nuclear Energy Institute, an arm of the nuclear power industry,
does provide information, but when was the last time you saw a pro-
nuclear spot duirng the evening prime time TV shows? I don't remember
seeing anything for probably a decade now. The former EEI used to
provide TV spots, but they are now defunct, giving way to NEI.
There are no easy answers. The key is $$$$$$$$$$. The anti's have it,
they are experts in getting out their message to the public, and
hammering away at those who do favor the nuclear option. In some
cases, I agree with some of the points they focused on. Those points
did in fact make our industry a better one, and more importantly, a
safer one as well. The 80s were not very kind to nuclear energy, as
far as problems to be dealt with. The 90s showed marked improvement,
Safety indicators showed that the plants were operating more
efficiently, and more safely.
The question is, what with the coming decade bring, with all fo the
plant buyouts, continued downsizing and significant cost cutting
measures being put into place. Will the positive trend continue, or,
have we reached the pinnacle of the bell shape curve?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy Perle Tel:(714) 545-0100 / (800) 548-5100
Director, Technical Extension 2306
ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Service Fax:(714) 668-3149
ICN Pharmaceuticals, Inc. E-Mail: sandyfl@earthlink.net
ICN Plaza, 3300 Hyland Avenue E-Mail: sperle@icnpharm.com
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Personal Website: http://sandyfl.nukeworker.net
ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Website: http://www.dosimetry.com
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html