Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site proper.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!houxm!houxz!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!zehntel!dual!proper!mikevp From: mikevp@proper.UUCP (Mike Van Pelt) Newsgroups: net.followup,net.politics Subject: Re: alternate, hopefully safe, energy sources Message-ID: <1498@proper.UUCP> Date: Tue, 14-Aug-84 02:42:14 EDT Article-I.D.: proper.1498 Posted: Tue Aug 14 02:42:14 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 10-Aug-84 02:26:24 EDT References: <9368@gatech.UUCP> Organization: Proper UNIX, San Leandro, CA Lines: 38Fusion certainly sounds good, but there are some real questions as to whether it can be made practical. The intense neutron bombardment that it would deliver to the internal structure of the plant is likely to cause structural problems: If you have to rebuild the plant every couple of months, it isn't likely to pay for itself. That same neutron bombardment will make those internal parts radioactive, though they aren't as long- lived as some of the actinides produced in fission plants. And it is by no means proven that "break even" is possible with current technology, much less useful amounts of power. That's the big problem: We are already in trouble as far as our electrial generation capacity goes. The anti-nukes make a big deal over the fact that there are no new orders for nuclear plants. That's true, but the whole truth is that there are no new orders for >any< kind of power plants, except for a few wind, solar, etc, which produce little dribbles of power. With the long lead times for getting a plant on line, we are going to have shortages, brownouts, and blackouts in the 90's. Can we wait for fusion? If you are hoping that fusion will be safe enough to calm the fears of the people who are waxing hysterical over the alleged dangers of fission plants, I wouldn't count on that either. I have seen some articles and heard some stuff from Berkely already which makes me pretty sure that the scare campaigns are being readied just in case fusion does pan out. Let me try this quote out on you: I got it from someone who claims he got it from one of his physics proffessors at UC Berkely. "Fusion plants use and release tritium, which is, next to plutonium, the worst thing you can put in your body. It goes straight to your DNA, then when it decays, *pow*, one broken DNA chain." Sure, that's absurd. But no more absurd than what is being peddled about fission plants. The real argument is not for or against fission or fusion. It is whether or not we are going to have the kind of technological civilization that uses electrical power in any quantity. The "saFety" issue is just a red herring, though lots of people have been taken in by the scare tactics and are concerned about safety.