Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 beta 3/9/83; site utecfc.UUCP Path: utzoo!utcsri!utai!uthub!utecfa!utecfc!dennis From: dennis@utecfc.UUCP (Dennis Ferguson) Newsgroups: can.politics Subject: Re: The Safest Way Message-ID: <41@utecfc.UUCP> Date: Tue, 17-Sep-85 00:12:35 EDT Article-I.D.: utecfc.41 Posted: Tue Sep 17 00:12:35 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 17-Sep-85 03:23:38 EDT References: <1386@utcsri.UUCP> <5952@utzoo.UUCP> <820@water.UUCP> <793@lsuc.UUCP> <5960@utzoo.UUCP> <4@ubc-cs.UUCP> Reply-To: dennis@utecfc.UUCP (Dennis Ferguson) Organization: Mechanical Engineering, University of Toronto Lines: 25 Summary: In article <4@ubc-cs.UUCP> morrison@ubc-cs.UUCP (Rick Morrison) writes: >In article <5960@utzoo.UUCP> henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) writes: >>I feel compelled to point out that even commercial nuclear power plants >>are the safest way of generating large amounts of power yet devised. > > It never ceases to amaze me how certain groups manage to reconcile > the view that, for example, acid rain deserves more study because > it "really isn't well enough understood," yet dismiss out of > hand concerns of environmentalists over the effects of > continuing low-level exposure to radioctive material in the > air we breath or the foods we eat. > I certainly agree with you that, if environmentalists are concerned about the effects of continuing low level radiation exposure on us, we should by all means study that. However it seems reasonable that, rather than concentrating our efforts on nuclear power plants to begin with, we should start with the radioactive source which you, and I (and I live pretty close to Pickering Nuclear G.S.) and just about everyone else in the world receives the lion's share of their yearly dose of radiation from. The sun. ---- Dennis Ferguson ...!utcsri!utecfc!dennis