[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: More Greenpeace intervention -Reply



At 02:52 PM 12/10/96 -0600, you wrote:
>Mr. Beyer, it is ironic that your opposition to nuke power is supposedly
>based on economic and environmental factors.  Haven't been looking at
>all the threads re: this subject, eh?  Not to reinvent the wheel, I refer you
>to Alex Gabbard's "Coal Combustion: Nuclear Resource or Danger".  I
>believe the address to be: 
>www.ornl.gov/ORNLReview/rev26-34/text/colmain.html

I have read Alex Gabbard's "Coal Combustion: Nuclear Resource or Danger. It
was quite educational for me. Radiation released in the production of
electricity is just one of the costs associated with the production of
electricity. In examining the total costs of an energy source I believe all
costs should be in the calculation; mining of fuel, transporting fuel,
capital costs of power plants, environmental costs, cost of regulation, cost
of technology development, governmental subsidies, and waste/treatment or
disposal. 

I would place radiation released in the production of power in the category
of environmental costs. As I said the amount of radiation released by
burning coal was surprising to me.

This analysis would seem to raise the cost of electricity produced by the
combustion of coal relative to other technologies(nuclear, gas, solar,
wind).        

>It is true that nuclear power does indeed place food on the table and
>roofs over people's heads and electricity for the fridge and TV for
>thousands of Terrans, something wrong with that? 

Not a thing.

>I am sure that the
>first thing on our minds, those who support nuke power, is "Thank God
>for nuclear energy!  If it wasn't for it, I'd be forever laterally
mobile"...I'll
>have to think about that one.  

No, I don't believe that job or financial security is the first thing that
motivates those in the Radsafe community to promote nuclear power, although
as an intagible it would be hard to say. 

When I hear proponents of any technology or policy I find it useful to see
if they have a vested interest in what the are promoting. Whether they do or
not does not affect the technical or economic validity of there position,
although it might speak to their motivations.
 
>And the amount of jobs created by windmills is...?

Currently, not many. The purpose of electrical generation is just that. To
provide an economic good(electricity) to a consumer. I don't believe the
power generating industry should be a jobs program. If it was meant to be a
jobs program, I would venture that a wind energy industry would be more
labor intensive than the nuclear power industry. 

Christopher Beyer
sweis@roadrunner.com