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

[Georg Bauhaus <sb463ba@l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>]

Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com> wrote:

:  For an anti-nuclear activist, there is no storage
: facility that can ever be safe enough, there is no means of
: transporting the waste to the facility that can ever be safe
: enough, and there is no form of nuclear power that can ever
: be safe enough.

For pro-nuclear-facilities activists there is safety
and a funny mathematics of risk percentages, I could say.

Why do people get agitated instead of comparing risks of
commercial and military employment of different dangerous technologies?
Compare the risk of failing contraceptives (9x %) and
the risk of failing Plant<typename Technology>(9x %).
Figures in nearly the same range, risks in nearly the same range?
Can you compare risk numbers?

Nuclear Waste is at best a subsidiary subject I think, ideally suited
to distracting attention from the whole set of risks which is 
multidimensional.

A *scientist* has said that as long as there is no proof that some
products of largely untested "alpha"-technology impose a risk, though
collegues say they might, he is free to use it in every setting he
chooses, inside or outside the lab. (Genetically manipulated plants
in this case.)


Georg