From: ken@sugra.uucp (Kenneth Ng)
Newsgroups: sci.environment,sci.physics,sci.energy
Subject: Re: Is car pooling for real? (was Re: Are bikes really less polluting?)
Date: 22 Jul 92 00:29:32 GMT
Organization: Private Computer, Totowa NJ

In article <1992Jul20.041225.4055@nmt.edu:, houle@nmt.edu (Paul Houle) writes:
: In article <dbbm4xl@dixie.com> jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond) writes:
: 
: >I'm honored.  But I'm still waiting for you to tell me what the non-zero
: >impact of nuclear power is.
:   Some operating reactors will fail catastrophically,
: and although improved technology and operating standards and the like
: can reduce this,  an increasing number of reactors would be likely
: to make up for this.  Funny enough,  nuke pukes think that existing
: operating standards for safety are too high...

You know, I don't think even John De Armond has ever advocated lowering
the safety standards of nuclear power plants.  I know that I have not.

:  But they'll always think
: that they are too high.  Confinement domes can minimize leakage into the
: environment -- but they didn't eliminate it entirely during the TMI
: incident,  and many of the new "inherently safe" reactors are intended
: to be operated inside a much weaker confinement facility.

I have not heard about any reduction of the defense in depth motif that
is prevalent in nuclear power plants for the passively safe designs.  With
simulation, reactors can be designed to stay safe in view of all known laws
of physics.  But I believe safeguards such as the containment dome should
remain in place in case we should discover new laws of physics ;-).

: If they are reprocessed,  plutonium is extracted,  which isn't a problem
: if the country has a vigorous program to build more nuclear weapons
: (And man,  the world needs many more nuclear weapons) or if a plutonium-
: based fuel cycle is in use (which introduces ~other~ problems).  Otherwise,
: we end stockpiling a nuclear fuel that is inherently dangerous that
: we don't have much of a use for.

You want to use plutonium from a power reactor in a nuclear bomb?  Gee,
why don't you use tar in your car in place of gasoline?  After all, they
are both forms of oil.  Using plutonium has few problems significantly
different than uranium in reactors that I am aware of.  

: 	Assuming that no corners get cut,  materials that are buried deeply
: in a continental shield are probably unlikely to get out.   Then again,
: medical waste can be disposed of safely as well...  but it's alot easier
: to dump those into the Charles River and let them wash up on the beach.
: Not to mention the messes that we've got up at Hanford and Savannah
: River ~already~.  And I suppose they are going to blame the radiation-
: induced structural flaws in the Hanford reactors on "those damn
: environmentalists" too.

Gee, getting the MILITARY and CIVILAN programs mixed up again aren't we?
But then I imagine murders and policemen are the same bacause they both
use guns.

: 	I could go on and on about this;  hell,  I didn't even mention
: the fact that a nuclear reactor dumps heat into it's environment...  Or
: that any country which is self-sufficient in nuclear power also is
: self-sufficient in making nuclear weapons.  Isn't proliferation great?
: Maybe if Saddam Hussein or Quadaffi manages to build a nuclear infrastructure,
: they can solve our population problems for us.

Gee, humans dump heat into their environment, should we kill you?  What
is the revalance?  Every form of energy conversion known to man eventually
'dumps heat' into the environment.  And again you espouse the urban myth
that nuclear power equals nuclear weapons.  You know, if I wanted to make
a nuclear bomb and not be detected by anyone, I wouldn't even start with
a nuclear power plant.  Too many hassles to solve like isotope spiking.
Sure you could get around it with an implosion design, but why use a
Joker style method of killing Batman when a simple gun shot will do?  Oh
yeah, we're not dealing with reality here.

: 	I wish "those damn nuclear power advocates" would just put their
: brains in gear before engaging their mouths...  Or drawing up plans for
: our future soceity.

Well, working in New York City and wearing a tie every day has had some
deterimental effects on my mental capabilities, but I believe I'm operating
at at least 50%.


-- 
Kenneth Ng
Please reply to kdn5669@hertz.njit.edu for now.
"No problem, here's how you build it" -- R. Barclay, ST: TNG
Xref: sparky sci.environment:10227 sci.energy:3763 sci.physics:11901