Re: Request for suggestion

["Thomas J Savin " <tjsav@lycos.com>]

Well its about time!  I was driving to work this morning and heard an interesting news bit.  It stated that air polution kills people.  Well this is good news - its about time something has hit the press that may help people to think.  I am firmly in Bernie's camp - fire against fire - no - I take that back its more like fact against fire - and we have the facts.

Only the best for everyone!
---
Tom Savin

On Wed, 13 Dec 2000 10:16:55  
 William V Lipton wrote:
>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
>


Get FREE Email/Voicemail with 15MB at Lycos Communications at http://comm.lycos.com
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html