It is also a shining example what can and will go wrong simply because
of lowest bidder building. It is all very well saying we have learned
our lesson but it will happen again.
The spent fuel is it's own very special form of pollution that the pro
neculear don't like to talk about but it will be polluting for the next
30,000 years All in all neculear has too many down sides.
The way of the future will be micro generation from natural scources
with hydrogen production to level out the peaks.
John and Muddy
"Faure, Marin" wrote:
>
> Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 15:09:23 -0300
> From: john.cranfield@ns.sympatico.ca (John Cranfield)
> Subject: Re: LRO: Power (was wasted youth)
>
> >However to all those who try to assure us that nuclear is non poluting
> have you so soon forgotten Chernobyl.
>
> The problem with using Chernobyl as an example of the nuclear power
> generation industry in action is that the Chernobyl plant was a shining
> example of how to do everything wrong in designing, operating, and
> maintaining a nuclear power plant. If that type of plant was state-of-
> the-art in nuclear power plants, then I would agree nuclear's not a good
> way to go. But in fact, a nuclear plant can be designed, operated, and
> maintained to be as reliable and safe as any other form of power generation
> except possibly hydro.
> ___________________________
> C. Marin Faure
> (original owner)
> 1973 Land Rover Series III-88
> 1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
> Seattle
>
> _________________________________________
> C. Marin Faure
> Producer/Director, Boeing Video Services
> telephone (425)393-7721
> mobile (206)650-5622
> fax: (425)393-7741
> e-mail: marin.faure@boeing.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Apr 05 2001 - 18:34:34 EDT