 |
 |
Hello Fil + all On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 5:05 AM, Filippo A. Salustri <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Karen et al, > <amicably omitted> > > Karen, please don't put yourself out to get the data. Again, all I meant > was that without a really clear understanding of the facts, it is very easy > to end up with an inconsistent value judgement on things. well, you wanted 'the numbers' or you won't believe in it : ). Since I've promised to look for it, then I'll just do it. I would love to play more if my scheldue allows. Unwittingly with 1001 things to do, pockets of time in between is good enough for me to deal with what is of essence. Trust me, I deal with different types of people/tasks everyday and I love it. Excellent for the mind. : ) > > If we decide that nuclear power is bad and shut down all the reactors, then > there will be consequences. > > I believe that those consequences will be worse, in the long run, than not > using nuclear power, at least for a while longer (like, another century or > so). I could explain that, but I get the feeling that I've been spouting > off a bit too much on this thread. > > So I'll go mark some assignments instead. :) > <amicably omitted> ... since you are clearly keen on the thread, I insist you stay awake with your shot of whisky to read this last one. : ) Fortunately the threads are virtually prinited in black and white. Everything's recorded, so I'll just do what I've promised whether you go mark the papers or read this anyway. I can't find the exact stats page that I read it at the office now. It was a great paper showing the costs involved. But what I've found in the process online are other interesting sources about the debate on nuclear and other alternative energy sources, where there are other findings discovered. Nuclear cost benefit analysis is challenged. Quick paste in the links & brief details: (A) On the account of nuclear vs alternative energy, where Fil feels that nuclear is 'the only game in town.' The late John O. Blackburn, Duke University’s Professor Emeritus of Economics and former Chancellor, Solar and Nuclear Costs—The Historic Crossover: Solar Energy is Now the Better Buy’ http://www.azocleantech.com/details.asp?newsID=11407 Obituary of Dr John Blackburn, which reflects his personality: http://news.duke.edu/2011/01/blackburn.html Prof Blackburn's paper: http://www.ncwarn.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/NCW-SolarReport_final1.pdf (B) Nuclear waste recycling problems: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=rethinking-nuclear-fuel-recycling http://www.nuclearwasterecycling.com/ (C) Nuclear reactors in quake zones: http://tinyurl.com/4kxux8u -- I really wouldn't want to try nuclear in the long term given the change of climates now where there appears to be a rise in the number of earthquakes. Naturally people may doubt about statistics. Despite the nature of hard core research stats, we live under the sky to know what is really happening. Sometimes, a better trust is within us. Within me, myself, I do not believe that nuclear is the solution. It has never been. With the Fukushima Nuclear incident, I am more than adament to vote no against nuclear energy. You know how the Japs work. They are very merticulous and responsible people. If this could happen, I think its serious enough to make a resolution. Till then, adios, my turn to disappear into my work in Singapore. Karen Fu