[FoRK] Why Fukushima made me stop worrying and love nuclear power
Gregory Alan Bolcer
greg at bolcer.org
Sat Mar 26 07:30:34 PDT 2011
Thus, going back to my original comment, it's like a red queen race,
design needs to be running at full speed just to keep up with usefulness.
In case of nuclear power, usefulness means the ability to generate
massive amounts of power versus the ability to design something that
doesn't leave a significant opportunity for a load of death and
destruction is the race.
On 3/25/2011 10:08 PM, Ken Ganshirt @ Yahoo wrote:
> --- On Fri, 3/25/11, Gregory Alan Bolcer<greg at bolcer.org> wrote:
>> Again, I'm not arguing *all* possible, just that it can be
>> incrementally changed. I'm arguing induction, you are
>> arguing limits.
> YeahBut. We are discussing situations where induction still leaves significant opportunity for a load of death and destruction.
> I'm not arguing limits.
> I'm arguing that you can't design around human stupidity and cupidity. If you follow that reasoning to its logical conclusion, I guess you could say I'm arguing that you CAN'T do "limits". You might even say that I'm agreeing with you, somewhat. That the very best you can do is incremental improvements that will never really succeed; merely reduce the risks and/or consequences incrementally. Perhaps to a point where sufficiently large numbers believe the tradeoffs have tipped in favor of going ahead with, or continuing, whatever it is. The other option being, of course, to simply refrain. (That's not a recommendation; simply an observation.)
> FoRK mailing list
greg at bolcer.org, http://bolcer.org, c: +1.714.928.5476
More information about the FoRK