Von:Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Gesendet: 22:02 Montag, 2.April 2012 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:The Fukushima disaster >No one disputes that coal fired plants kill far more people than nuclear power, even taking into account casualties from uranium mining pollution. >Putting aside the long term perspective, nuclear power is uniquely disastrous from an economic and business point of view. No other source of energy could conceivably cause so much damage in a single accident,
Agree. Your assessment is sane. What seems to be difficult to understand to some, is distinguishing different risk-categories. a) coal-fired plants probably emit more radioactivity than any orderly working nuclear power-plant over decades. Because this has an intrinsic upper limit, as a function of time, society can decide and switch it off. b) on the other hand, you have a nuclear plant, which occasionally explodes or is otherwise severely damaged, and kills the neighbouring people. Now how to decide? Assume, both probabilities are equal in the long term, (which is purely hypothetical, because noone knows) . Which option would you choose? Surprise: It depends where you live! And this has other surprising consequences, eg, that the probability-space in the time-domain is transformed into a probability-space in the space-domain. And the results are VERY different. G.
