Re: Coal vs. Nuclear

["ALDEN N TSCHAECHE" <XAT@inel.gov>]

Agreed. But, the problem is: there may really be no greenhouse effect
and attendant global warming. A bunch of CO2 MAY not be a problem and
actually MAY be good for the plants, vegitarian, not nuclear. So - we
need to be a little careful not to use that argument until we KNOW the
greenhouse effect will cause problems for the earth.  Unless, that is, we
want to be like the antis and scare people, perhaps unnecessarily,
about coal plants.
  The same argument may be made about any fossil fueled electric
generating stations, heating homes with wood, burning gasoline in cars,
etc. Al.

*** Reply to note of 12/05/95 14:23

From: Gary H. Kramer
To: RADSAFE --INELMAIL RADSAFE

Subject: Re: Coal vs. Nuclear

Greetings

I have enjoyed following this thread but I haven't seen anything
mentioned about the difference in carbon dioxide releases between the
two type of energy production.

Following the previous note about what should be told to people, perhaps
it should be pointed out that large amounts of carbon dioxide are going
to hurt everyone if we keep dumping it in the atmosphere, especially if
you live on the coast :(   So let's convert ALL to coal fired generating
stations to nuclear!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
| H   H   M       M   L        Gary H. Kramer                         |
| H   H   MM     MM   L        Head, Human Monitoring Laboratory      |
| H   H   M M   M M   L        Canadian National Calibration Reference|
| H   H   M  M M  M   L        Centre for In-Vivo Monitoring          |
| HHHHH   M   M   M   L        775 Brookfield Road, Ottawa, Ontario   |
| H   H   M       M   L        CANADA K1A 1C1                         |
| H   H   M       M   L        Tel: 613 954 6668;  Fax 613 957 1089   |
| H   H   M       M   LLLLLLL  GKRAMER@HPB.HWC.CA                     |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------