nuclear safety groups?

[Steve Frantz <sfrantz@YAHOO.COM>]

The UCS and other groups say that they are not anti-nuclear,

they are pro-nuclear safety.



OK, then let them define their safety goal in measurable means.



How thick of a containment is safe? How many hours of training

per year for the licensed operators? How many backup deisel

generators? What level of releases above background? How many

hours of NRC inspection per year? How many radiation induced

cancers in the neighboring population? Anything at all

quantifiable?



They will not answer these questions. They will only say that

what is being done is not enough. Anything more that is done is

also not enough. The plants are not safe.



Can the plants be made safe through modification? NO! They are

very dangerous and we can’t trust the utility or the NRC to do

what they promise!



Will the plants be safe if they are shut down? NO! The spent

nuclear fuel at the site is very dangerous!



Should the spent nuclear fuel be moved to Nevada or some other

storage facility? NO! Moving it is much too dangerous!



They say that the plants are unsafe if operating, unsafe if

shutdown, and unsafe if the utility tries to remove the

radioactive material.



What is their solution? THERE IS NO SOLUTION!!!



Now, why would anyone think that they are anti-nuclear?



Stephen Frantz

Reed College

sfrantz@reed.edu





__________________________________________________

Do You Yahoo!?

Find a job, post your resume.

http://careers.yahoo.com

************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.