RE: Norm avoids nothing!

["Thomas J Savin " <tjsav@LYCOS.COM>]

Hi Ted,



Yes - of course that makes sense, of what you say.  The reason I used the term "NOW" is because of the urgency that Norm and co-horts have vocally said their peace.  Potential dirty bombs.  I do beleive that they do NOT have an answer to what they call a problem.  This, and this only, is my point.



Enjoy,  Tom

---

Tom Savin



On Sat, 17 Nov 2001 12:31:12  

 Ted Rockwell wrote:

>> we need NOW to get the waste off the nuclear power sites so that we do not

>have to worry about terrorist attacks on waste.

>

>If nuclear waste does not pose a significant public hazard (defined as less

>of a hazard than other toxic materials stored at thousands of locations

>across the country), which I think is demonstrable beyond doubt by simple

>engineering calculations, then why is reducing 100 such locations to one a

>task worthy of spending billions on?

>

>The factors other than public hazard that argue for moving the waste from

>some sites should be examined and resolved on their individual merits,

>without involvement of hysterical safety claims.  That should not be much of

>a problem in that context.

>

>And why does a material that loses its toxicity over time cause greater

>concern than other toxicants that retain their toxicity forever?

>

>Ted Rockwell

>

>

>************************************************************************

>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.

>

>





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

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.