[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
persistence of anti-nuclear activism
So who
is responsible for the waste in efforts and money: the poor innocent who calls
for more money to be spent on making reactors safer, or the engineer who decides
we shall redimension all pumps and triple them for a good measure, the scientist
who says more research is needed... the guy who makes a living writing
regulations in government... ?
In the
(sort of) plot to uninvent nuclear science all do cooperate: let's make it
harder, more difficult, more expensive: those who are in get to keep making
money, and those who are out and protest are helping for
free.
One
mayor problem with nuclear things in general has been this: complicity among
professionals, the public and the politicos to make the science and the
economy all but transparent. You can bloat the power stations cost, so long
as electricity stays cheaper anyhow.
In my
opinion, it is irrelevant here to comment the latest idiocy from the latest
anti-nuclear activist (they are the illiberal ones, to be sure, by the
way). Let us ask ourselves instead: who is really against nuclear energy - and
what reasons move the media - and why?
Marco
Their
usual tactic is to throw so many obstacles into the roadway that it becomes
progressively more expensive to accomplish anything. Then they complain that
nuclear anything costs too much. If they and others of their ilk were required
to post a bond every time they created a cost increase with one of their
exaggerations, and to forfeit it when they were shown to be wrong, they would
quickly run their own cost-benefit analysis and straighten up.
Jack
Earley
Radiological Engineer