Dee D. Flint wrote:
"Kim W5TIT" wrote in message
...

"N2EY" wrote in message
...

In article , "charlesb"
writes:


Keep in mind the fact that fossil-fuel burning plants pollute while

working

perfectly.

Yup. So do nuclear plants. The pollution in each case is different, of

course.

Nuke plants generate various forms of radioactive waste that will remain
hazardous for far longer than anyone realistically knows how to deal

with.

Unlike the nuclear plants, they don't have to wait for an
accident in order to cause a problem.

But when a nuke plant has a problem, it's a BIG problem!

73 de Jim, N2EY


Yep, my point exactly. And, waste generation and facilitation is a part

of

the equation I completely forgot to even include in the debate. And, it's

a

very important part of the issue.

Suffice it to say that no one will ever convince me that nuclear

generation

is a cost/environmental/health effective way for our power needs. It will
never happen to be that nuclear generation is the way to go...and the
industry recognizes that as well. No new nuclear power generation is
planned, 'least not that I know of...



Because they are blocked on every hand by people who operate on emotions
rather data.

Dee, I find myself in the uncomfortable position of agreeing with you,
but very much disagreeing with your argument.

Uranium miners get ill with apalling regularity. This is part of the
overall cost of this method of energy production, unless you are force
fitting your argument to include only the power generation stage. There
are piles of radioactive tailings around some towns out west. Kids often
play on them.

http://www.inmotionmagazine.com/miners.html

http://www.downwinders.org/cortez.htm

These are just a couple examples.

Is that directly attributable? Gosh who knows? Cigarettes were "not
proven to be deadly until not all that many yars ago, while I have read
literature from the 1860's that documented all the effects that tobacco
smoking causes. My guess is that if a group of people involved in an
activity show statistically significant trends in illness, some activity
they have in common just may be responsible.

I don't suspect you will understand this, but part of your approach is
exactly why people distrust what they are told about NP.

- Mike KB3EIA -