Re: OT: Nuclear Waste (Was Re-Marketing Ada)

["Robert I. Eachus" <rieachus@comcast.net>]

Russ wrote:

> Once you know the basic facts, it is easy to understand why nuclear
> power is orders of magnitude safer that solar power could ever be. But
> don't hold your breath waiting for the mass media to suddenly start
> informing the public about it.

I looked at that data Russ, and while the risks from nuclear power 
plants look correct, the threat of coal burning plants is significantly 
understated.  Offhand, two major factors omitted are grade crossing 
accidents involving trains hauling coal to power plants, and the loss of 
life from mining the coal.  As I recall, the estimates for both are in 
the range of 1 to 2 deaths per year of operation.  Nowhere near the 
numbers for air pollution, but greater than the numbers for radon 
emissions and cancer causing chemicals.

But of course, the biggest shocker for those who haven't studied the 
issue is that the net effect of nuclear power plants is to significantly 
reduce the long-term exposure of the population to radiation.  Radon is 
nasty.  It is a gas and has a long enough lifetime to seep from the 
ground into enclosed places, then it decays into several other 
radioactive isotopes, some of which are also biologically active.  (For 
example, actiniums tends to accumulte in bones.)

Since nuclear reactors are designed to "burn-up" the radon emitted from 
the uranium in the fuel, and capture the heat generated, as long as the 
radon captured when mining the original ore is dealt with, the net risk 
from nuclear power plants is negative--they save more lives than they 
consume.  (This is true even if you add in the deaths associated with 
the construction and decomissioning of the reactor.)

-- 
                                           Robert I. Eachus

100% Ada, no bugs--the only way to create software.