From: ustai@memstvx1.memst.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.asean
Subject: Re: Malaysia news, Oct, 3,1992.=>N-power plant.
Date: 16 Nov 92 08:21:08 GMT
Article-I.D.: memstvx1.1992Nov16.142109.4099
Organization: Memphis State University

In article <1992Nov16.141522.1@kean.ucs.mun.ca>, kshan@kean.ucs.mun.ca writes:
> 
>   In the article, on 11, nov, 1992. azran@leland.stanford.edu (Azran Osman 
> Roni) wrote:
> 
>> I don't know much about Mr. samy Vellu neither do I care to talk about 
>> his personal character. However, I am more interested in what you, or the 
>> group of doctors suggest as alternative energy resources besides nuclear 
>> energy. Now, I would say that I personally am opposed to the idea of having 

	As he points out, what alternatives are there out there?
> 
>   Then try to learn more about his character, Mr. Azran ! It is your right 
> and your duty to know more about your selected minister. Mr. Azran, you 

	I don't think he voted in Sungai Siput.  Besides, what do you know of
any of the other ministers?  How many ministers are there in the Prime
Minister's Department?  Can you name even one?

> claimed that you oppose the idea of N-power plant, but again you think that 
> it is good to have some experiences in this field. Tell me, which sides do 
> you stand ? Or it is just that you always type before you think ? Anyhow, 

	Just because you oppose something doesn't mean you don't have to do it. 
Like our parliament, once a law/etc is passed, the whole govt have to support
it.  All for one and one for all.

> it is not the matter of having "a little bit" of experience in this field; 
> frankly, it is the matter of life and death of 18 million population in 
> Malaysia. If there were any nuclear dissaster happened, who would take the 

	Not 18 million, just the people in the vicinity, and the govt would
hardly place a nuclear in the middle of KL, would it?  Let's not be so
pseudodramatic.

> responsibility ? Samy Vellu or Dr. Mahathir ? Or is the government going to 
> shift the blames to the technicians ? Why use nuclear power, since Malaysia 

	Obviously the govt, after all, they are the ones who choose the
technicians (in a manner of speaking).

> can resort to other forms of energy, eg wind, solar etc.. I am not sure how 
> much it will cost to construct a N-power plant. But I figure out that if 
> the government needs a good N-plant, then is should be very expansive, 
> unless if the governmnet could only appropriate "a few thousands" dollars 
> to make one.

	But the cost of getting the energy from the nuclear reactors is much
less than from the "natural" forms of energy.  Much much less.  And they are
not without side effects too.  To get a good amount of solar energy, you will
have to cover a good bit of the country, ie, a place like Sahara desert is
good.  The "windwheels" are not too efficient.  Many of the other "alternative"
forms of energy are still in development, or are used only on small scales.

>> Point is, it is always easy to simply nouth-off criticism, lot harder to 
>> be constructive about it....

	Good thing to keep in mind....
> 
> What is wrong to criticize your own government ? Expecially, when I think 
> he is taking a wrong move. It is one of the responsibilities for a citizen 
> to point out the wrongness and the weakness of the government. It is really 

	From an informed point of view.  You have already stated you have no
idea of the costs involved.  Do you know of the technical details?  The
difference between different types of generators?  The cost?  What do you know
other than the fact that you oppose nuclear power?  I oppose nuclear power too,
but the stuff that I have read points out that it is a necessary evil.

> Malaysia who dares to say that she has a good record in disposing 
> the nuclear waste and she has enough technicians and scientics to operate 

	No one has a good record, but you have to choose the lesser of the two
evils.  Major user of energy (electricity) is the industry.  Without industry,
Malaysia is likely to be much worse off than she is now.  So, the conclusion is
that we must have energy.  So far, the cheapest method of getting the energy is
nuclear power.  The disposal is (as usual) left as a chore for the future
generations.  (This is just a plain statement of what is happening all over the
world, not my stand.)

> the plant. Mr. Azran could you give any explaination, any explaination at 
> all for the incident in Bukit Merah, Perak state ? You couln't, could you ? 

	He wasn't there, was he?  Obviously the govt made a mistake there. 
From the newspaper reports it seems that the facility didn't dispose of the
used materials properly.  If it were done, would you support the project?
	Personally, I would tend to go more for hydro projects, it has been
done in lotsa places, and M'sia has lotsa nice rivers for it, and you get a
nice fishing place to boot...
	Ciao.

-Tai