RE: Humans Raise Risk of Europe Heatwaves -Greenhouse Effect a Non-Issue???

["Jaro" <jaro-10kbq@sympatico.ca>]

As an avid skater, I would say that the difference is between "skating on

thin ice" (anthropogenic GHGs & climate effects) versus skating on very

thick, solid ice :  the proven benefits of nuke power.



 Jaro Franta, P.Eng.

Tel.: (514) 875-3444

Montréal, Québec

frantaj@aecl.ca

web master, CNS Québec branch:

http://www.cns-snc.ca/branches/quebec/quebec.html



<><><><><><><><><><><>







-----Original Message-----

From: owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

[mailto:owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu]On Behalf Of farbersa

Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 10:14 PM

To: Dukelow, James S Jr; howard long; radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

Subject: Re: Humans Raise Risk of Europe Heatwaves -Greenhouse Effect a

Non-Issue???





Jim:

Thanks for your thoughtful comment on the questionable oism paper against

the greenhouse effect. I find the two positions argued by Howard Long a

bit curious. He wants to get the public, regulators, and legislators to be

less concerned about minor radiation exposures and even accept the

benefits of radiation hormesis --something that will likely happen when

hell freezes over. All these groups act on the basis that they "know" that

ionizing radiation is harmful down to the last photon or alpha emission.



At the same time, Howard is arguing against there being any problem with

the release of about twenty billion tons of carbon dioxide a year into the

air from fossil fuel burning  leading to steady increases in atmospheric

CO2 levels [which baseload nuclear generation would help reduce]. Everyone

[the public, regulators, and legislators] "knows" that the greenhouse

effect is a serious environmental issue. This issue has the potential to

cut nuclear power plant radiation risks some "slack" in the popular mind,

if it were widely understood and accepted that nuclear power generated

electricity helps to avoid some of the "accepted" and "obvious" risks from

the greenhouse effect.



I'm not a climate scientist, and neither is Howard. However, when the

broad scientific consensus from the top climate research centers around

the world is coming to accept the greenhouse effect is real and growing

worse -- with sea level rising 3 mm/year [ 1 inch/8 years], why try to

fight it?



Even Tony Blair and the British Government is going to go to the mat

opposing the Bush administration for not recognizing the seriousness of

the greenhouse effect on the world's climate.



Stewart Farber

farbersa@optonline.net



---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.797 / Virus Database: 541 - Release Date: 11/15/2004



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

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 can view the Radsafe archives at

http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/